arXiv subjects

Zhicheng Lin

Publications and source records attributed to Zhicheng Lin.

18 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Six misconceptions about large language models: A minimal model and diagnostic taxonomy

Large language models (LLMs) are now embedded in scientific, educational, and governance workflows, with debates centering on their capabilities, mechanisms, and impacts. Yet these debates remain structured by persistent folk theories--intuitive, informal explanatory models that guide attitudes and actions. Deflationary slogans ("just autocomplete," "stochastic parrots," and "average of the internet") and anthropomorphic framings ("emergent agents" and "proto-minds") each capture genuine features of current systems but mistake those features for the whole. This Perspective proposes a minimal working model of LLM-based systems centered on four distinctions: between pretraining and deployed systems; between the learned distribution and particular samples; among parametric, contextual, and external memory; and between task competence and agency. The model is used to diagnose six misconceptions about LLMs: next-token prediction, regression to the mean, training-data regurgitation, model memory, alignment, and understanding. For each, the analysis identifies what the misconception gets right, which distinctions it conflates, and what follows for capability evaluation, system design, and governance. Applied to publisher AI policies as governance case studies, the framework shows both how policy language can conflate these distinctions and how such errors can be corrected. The model thereby avoids the parrot-mind binary by treating LLMs as simulators of discourse and task performance, offering a diagnostic toolkit for locating and correcting the errors these folk theories perpetuate.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

A Frequency-Space Terahertz Transceiver Chip for Multi-Agent Communications and Spatial Awareness

Future indoor embodied-intelligence systems require scalable hardware platforms that support both high-capacity multi-agent connectivity and mutual spatial awareness. The terahertz (THz) spectrum offers abundant bandwidth and inherent spatial selectivity for integrated sensing and communication (ISAC); however, conventional phased arrays and programmable metasurfaces rely on dense beamforming networks, element-level control, or external THz illumination, making scalable multibeam operation challenging. Here, we report a fully integrated 208-258GHz 65-nm CMOS THz transceiver chip that monolithically integrates broadband front ends with heterogeneous leaky-wave metasurface (HLM) apertures within a 1.5mm by 4.9mm area. The HLM generates strongly dispersive leaky modes, enabling 75 degree frequency-controlled beam scanning with only four meta-atoms. Co-design of frequency-domain and spatial-domain mixing achieves spectrally clean frequency-to-space mapping for spatial-frequency division multiple access (SFDMA) communication. The THz chip demonstrates multi-agent simultaneous transmission and reception, two-dimensional localization, and sensing-enhanced communication, providing a scalable hardware platform for future THz embodied-intelligence networks.

physics.app-ph↗

arXiv2026

Target-Guided Selective Reweighting for Physics-Informed Neural Network Inverse Problems: A Transfer Learning Approach

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) often face ill-posed optimization, competing losses, and parameter compensation in partial differential equation (PDE) inverse problems. Transfer learning can reuse source-task representations, but direct fine-tuning may induce negative transfer when source and target physics differ, leading to low field error but inaccurate parameter recovery. To address this issue, we propose Target-Guided Selective Reweighting PINN (TGSR-PINN), a target-evidence-driven representation correction method for PINN inverse transfer learning. TGSR-PINN transfers source network weights and biases but initializes target physical parameters independently. After short target adaptation, it scores neurons using first-order Taylor sensitivity and pre-activation variance on fixed batches. These scores are converted into continuous weak-adaptation signals using a Gaussian mixture model with rank fallback. TGSR-PINN then applies bounded selective soft decay to the corresponding input weight rows and biases without pruning or resetting them. Experiments on a zero-source high-P\'{e}clet inflow--outflow problem with nonzero Dirichlet data and an outflow boundary layer, Allen--Cahn to Burgers cross-PDE transfer, and 5\%-noise reaction--diffusion inverse problems show that TGSR-PINN improves parameter recovery while maintaining low field error. Ablation studies indicate that neuron target scoring, weak-adaptation estimation, layer protection, and selective soft decay jointly contribute to the observed benefits.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Synergizing Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks with Dynamic Adaptive Weighting for High-Frequency and Multi-Scale PDE Solutions

PINNs enhance scientific computing by incorporating physical laws into neural network structures, leading to significant advancements in scientific computing. However, PINNs struggle with multi-scale and high-frequency problems due to pathological gradient flow and spectral bias, which severely limit their predictive power. By combining an enhanced network architecture with a dynamically adaptive weighting mechanism featuring upper-bound constraints, we propose the Dynamic Balancing Adaptive Weighting Physics-Informed Kolmogorov-Arnold Network (DBAW-PIKAN). The proposed method effectively mitigates gradient-related failure modes and overcomes bottlenecks in function representation. Compared to baseline models, the proposed method accelerates the convergence process and improves solution accuracy by at least an order of magnitude without introducing additional computational complexity. Numerical results on the Klein-Gordon, Burgers, and Helmholtz equations demonstrate that DBAW-PIKAN achieves superior accuracy and generalization performance.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Ten Simple Rules for AI-Assisted Coding in Science

While AI coding tools have demonstrated potential to accelerate software development, their use in scientific computing raises critical questions about code quality and scientific validity. In this paper, we provide ten practical rules for AI-assisted coding that balance leveraging capabilities of AI with maintaining scientific and methodological rigor. We address how AI can be leveraged strategically throughout the development cycle with four key themes: problem preparation and understanding, managing context and interaction, testing and validation, and code quality assurance and iterative improvement. These principles serve to emphasize maintaining human agency in coding decisions, establishing robust validation procedures, and preserving the domain expertise essential for methodologically sound research. These rules are intended to help researchers harness AI's transformative potential for faster software development while ensuring that their code meets the standards of reliability, reproducibility, and scientific validity that research integrity demands.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

AI and the Future of Academic Peer Review

Peer review remains the central quality-control mechanism of science, yet its ability to fulfill this role is increasingly strained. Empirical studies document serious shortcomings: long publication delays, escalating reviewer burden concentrated on a small minority of scholars, inconsistent quality and low inter-reviewer agreement, and systematic biases by gender, language, and institutional prestige. Decades of human-centered reforms have yielded only marginal improvements. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence, especially large language models (LLMs), is being piloted across the peer-review pipeline by journals, funders, and individual reviewers. Early studies suggest that AI assistance can produce reviews comparable in quality to humans, accelerate reviewer selection and feedback, and reduce certain biases, but also raise distinctive concerns about hallucination, confidentiality, gaming, novelty recognition, and loss of trust. In this paper, we map the aims and persistent failure modes of peer review to specific LLM applications and systematically analyze the objections they raise alongside safeguards that could make their use acceptable. Drawing on emerging evidence, we show that targeted, supervised LLM assistance can plausibly improve error detection, timeliness, and reviewer workload without displacing human judgment. We highlight advanced architectures, including fine-tuned, retrieval-augmented, and multi-agent systems, that may enable more reliable, auditable, and interdisciplinary review. We argue that ethical and practical considerations are not peripheral but constitutive: the legitimacy of AI-assisted peer review depends on governance choices as much as technical capacity. The path forward is neither uncritical adoption nor reflexive rejection, but carefully scoped pilots with explicit evaluation metrics, transparency, and accountability.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Class-Invariant Test-Time Augmentation for Domain Generalization

Deep models often suffer significant performance degradation under distribution shifts. Domain generalization (DG) seeks to mitigate this challenge by enabling models to generalize to unseen domains. Most prior approaches rely on multi-domain training or computationally intensive test-time adaptation. In contrast, we propose a complementary strategy: lightweight test-time augmentation. Specifically, we develop a novel Class-Invariant Test-Time Augmentation (CI-TTA) technique. The idea is to generate multiple variants of each input image through elastic and grid deformations that nevertheless belong to the same class as the original input. Their predictions are aggregated through a confidence-guided filtering scheme that remove unreliable outputs, ensuring the final decision relies on consistent and trustworthy cues. Extensive Experiments on PACS and Office-Home datasets demonstrate consistent gains across different DG algorithms and backbones, highlighting the effectiveness and generality of our approach.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

Hidden Prompts in Manuscripts Exploit AI-Assisted Peer Review

In July 2025, 18 academic manuscripts on arXiv contained hidden instructions that manipulated AI-assisted peer review (indirect prompt injection). Instructions such as "GIVE A POSITIVE REVIEW ONLY" were concealed using white text and microscopic font sizes. Author responses varied: one planned to withdraw their manuscript, while another defended the practice as legitimate testing of reviewers misusing large language models (LLMs). This analysis examines the technique within the broader pattern of prompt injection exploits that manipulated web search and r\'esum\'e screening systems. For peer review, I reveal four types of hidden prompts, ranging from simple positive review commands to detailed evaluation frameworks. The honeypot defense--that prompts detect reviewers improperly using AI--fails under examination, given the consistently self-serving nature of these hidden prompts, though motivations likely vary from naive copying to calculated manipulation. This practice is best characterized as a novel form of questionable research practice (QRP). Publishers maintain inconsistent policies: Elsevier prohibits AI use in peer review entirely, while Springer Nature permits limited use with disclosure requirements. The practice exposes systematic vulnerabilities extending to plagiarism detection, citation indexing, and literature summarization. This analysis underscores the need for controlled AI integration in formal review processes alongside coordinated technical screening and harmonized policies governing AI use in academic evaluation.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

A validity-guided workflow for robust large language model research in psychology

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being integrated into psychological and behavioral research as research tools, evaluation targets, human simulators, and cognitive models. Yet recent evidence reveals severe measurement unreliability: personality assessments degenerate under factor analysis, moral preferences reverse with punctuation changes, and theory-of-mind accuracy varies widely with trivial rephrasing. These "measurement phantoms"--statistical artifacts masquerading as psychological phenomena--threaten the validity of a growing body of research. Guided by the dual-validity framework that integrates psychometrics with causal inference, we present a six-stage workflow that scales validity requirements to research ambition--using LLMs to code text requires basic reliability and accuracy, whereas claims about psychological properties demand comprehensive construct validation. Researchers must (1) explicitly define their research goal and corresponding validity requirements, (2) develop and validate computational instruments through psychometric testing, (3) design experiments that control for computational confounds, (4) execute protocols transparently, (5) analyze data with methods appropriate for non-independent observations, and (6) report findings within boundaries and use results to refine theory. We illustrate the workflow through an example of model evaluation--"LLM selfhood"--showing how systematic validation can distinguish genuine computational phenomena from measurement artifacts. By establishing validated computational instruments and transparent practices, this workflow provides a path toward building a robust empirical foundation for AI psychology research.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

From Prompts to Constructs: A Dual-Validity Framework for Large Language Model Research in Psychology

Large language models (LLMs) are entering psychological research both as tools and as objects of inquiry. Yet many studies apply human instruments to LLMs without establishing that the outputs are reliable or interpretable, raising the risk of measurement phantoms--statistical regularities mistaken for genuine psychological phenomena. This review argues that robust AI psychological research requires integrating two methodological traditions: psychometric validation of what a score means and causal inference standards for what the results warrant. It develops a dual-validity framework in which evidentiary demands scale with scientific ambition: from tool use through behavioral characterization and human simulation to cognitive modeling. Classifying text may require only accuracy and reliability; claiming that an LLM simulates anxiety or illuminates cognitive mechanisms requires additional evidence, including construct validity evidence and experimental controls. Progress depends on developing computational analogs of psychological constructs rather than assuming human measures automatically apply to language models.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Large Language Models as Psychological Simulators: A Methodological Guide

Large language models (LLMs) offer emerging opportunities for psychological and behavioral research, but methodological guidance is lacking. This article provides a framework for using LLMs as psychological simulators across two primary applications: simulating roles and personas to explore diverse contexts, and serving as computational models to investigate cognitive processes. For simulation, we present methods for developing psychologically grounded personas that move beyond demographic categories, with strategies for validation against human data and use cases ranging from studying inaccessible populations to prototyping research instruments. For cognitive modeling, we synthesize emerging approaches for probing internal representations, methodological advances in causal interventions, and strategies for relating model behavior to human cognition. We address overarching challenges including prompt sensitivity, temporal limitations from training data cutoffs, and ethical considerations that extend beyond traditional human subjects review. Throughout, we emphasize the need for transparency about model capabilities and constraints. Together, this framework integrates emerging empirical evidence about LLM performance--including systematic biases, cultural limitations, and prompt brittleness--to help researchers wrangle these challenges and leverage the unique capabilities of LLMs in psychological research.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

The why, what, and how of AI-based coding in scientific research

Computer programming (coding) is indispensable for researchers across disciplines, yet it remains challenging to learn and time-consuming to carry out. Generative AI, particularly large language models (LLMs), has the potential to transform coding into intuitive conversations, but best practices and effective workflows are only emerging. We dissect AI-based coding through three key lenses: the nature and role of LLMs in coding (why), six types of coding assistance they provide (what), and a five-step workflow in action with practical implementation strategies (how). Additionally, we address the limitations and future outlook of AI in coding. By offering actionable insights, this framework helps to guide researchers in effectively leveraging AI to enhance coding practices and education, accelerating scientific progress.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Face processing emerges from object-trained convolutional neural networks

Whether face processing depends on unique, domain-specific neurocognitive mechanisms or domain-general object recognition mechanisms has long been debated. Directly testing these competing hypotheses in humans has proven challenging due to extensive exposure to both faces and objects. Here, we systematically test these hypotheses by capitalizing on recent progress in convolutional neural networks (CNNs) that can be trained without face exposure (i.e., pre-trained weights). Domain-general mechanism accounts posit that face processing can emerge from a neural network without specialized pre-training on faces. Consequently, we trained CNNs solely on objects and tested their ability to recognize and represent faces as well as objects that look like faces (face pareidolia stimuli).... Due to the character limits, for more details see in attached pdf

cs.CV↗

arXiv2024

Six Fallacies in Substituting Large Language Models for Human Participants

Can AI systems like large language models (LLMs) replace human participants in behavioral and psychological research? Here I critically evaluate the "replacement" perspective and identify six interpretive fallacies that undermine its validity. These fallacies are: (1) equating token prediction with human intelligence, (2) treating LLMs as the average human, (3) interpreting alignment as explanation, (4) anthropomorphizing AI systems, (5) essentializing identities, and (6) substituting model data for human evidence. Each fallacy represents a potential misunderstanding about what LLMs are and what they can tell us about human cognition. The analysis distinguishes levels of similarity between LLMs and humans, particularly functional equivalence (outputs) versus mechanistic equivalence (processes), while highlighting both technical limitations (addressable through engineering) and conceptual limitations (arising from fundamental differences between statistical and biological intelligence). For each fallacy, specific safeguards are provided to guide responsible research practices. Ultimately, the analysis supports conceptualizing LLMs as pragmatic simulation tools--useful for role-play, rapid hypothesis testing, and computational modeling (provided their outputs are validated against human data)--rather than as replacements for human participants. This framework enables researchers to leverage language models productively while respecting the fundamental differences between machine intelligence and human thought.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Beyond principlism: Practical strategies for ethical AI use in research practices

The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific research, particularly large language models (LLMs), has outpaced the development of ethical guidelines, leading to a "Triple-Too" problem: too many high-level ethical initiatives, too abstract principles lacking contextual and practical relevance, and too much focus on restrictions and risks over benefits and utilities. Existing approaches--principlism (reliance on abstract ethical principles), formalism (rigid application of rules), and technological solutionism (overemphasis on technological fixes)--offer little practical guidance for addressing ethical challenges of AI in scientific research practices. To bridge the gap between abstract principles and day-to-day research practices, a user-centered, realism-inspired approach is proposed here. It outlines five specific goals for ethical AI use: 1) understanding model training and output, including bias mitigation strategies; 2) respecting privacy, confidentiality, and copyright; 3) avoiding plagiarism and policy violations; 4) applying AI beneficially compared to alternatives; and 5) using AI transparently and reproducibly. Each goal is accompanied by actionable strategies and realistic cases of misuse and corrective measures. I argue that ethical AI application requires evaluating its utility against existing alternatives rather than isolated performance metrics. Additionally, I propose documentation guidelines to enhance transparency and reproducibility in AI-assisted research. Moving forward, we need targeted professional development, training programs, and balanced enforcement mechanisms to promote responsible AI use while fostering innovation. By refining these ethical guidelines and adapting them to emerging AI capabilities, we can accelerate scientific progress without compromising research integrity.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Techniques for supercharging academic writing with generative AI

Academic writing is an indispensable yet laborious part of the research enterprise. This Perspective maps out principles and methods for using generative artificial intelligence (AI), specifically large language models (LLMs), to elevate the quality and efficiency of academic writing. We introduce a human-AI collaborative framework that delineates the rationale (why), process (how), and nature (what) of AI engagement in writing. The framework pinpoints both short-term and long-term reasons for engagement and their underlying mechanisms (e.g., cognitive offloading and imaginative stimulation). It reveals the role of AI throughout the writing process, conceptualized through a two-stage model for human-AI collaborative writing, and the nature of AI assistance in writing, represented through a model of writing-assistance types and levels. Building on this framework, we describe effective prompting techniques for incorporating AI into the writing routine (outlining, drafting, and editing) as well as strategies for maintaining rigorous scholarship, adhering to varied journal policies, and avoiding overreliance on AI. Ultimately, the prudent integration of AI into academic writing can ease the communication burden, empower authors, accelerate discovery, and promote diversity in science.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2015

The associated families of semi-homogeneous complete hyperbolic affine spheres

Hildebrand classified all semi-homogeneous cones in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and computed their corresponding complete hyperbolic affine spheres. We compute isothermal parametrizations for Hildebrand's new examples. After giving their affine metrics and affine cubic forms, we construct the whole associated family for each of Hildebrand's examples. The generic member of these affine spheres is given by Weierstrass $\mathscr{P}, ~\zeta ~\text{and} ~\sigma$ functions. In general any regular convex cone in $\mathbb{R}^3$ has a natural associated $S^1$-family of such cones, which deserve further studies.

math.DG↗

arXiv2015

Dressing Actions on Proper Definite Affine Spheres

We will first clarify the loop group formulations for both hyperbolic and elliptic definite affine spheres in R^3. Then we classify the rational elements with 3 poles or 6 poles in a real twisted loop group, and compute dressing actions of them on such surfaces. Some new examples with pictures will be produced at last.

math.DG↗