arXiv:2605.24180v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Collaboration is the defining mode of modern science, yet its core mechanism -- feedback -- remains hard to observe, difficult to scale, and unequally distributed. Here we test whether large language models (LLMs) can contribute to this hidden but vital practice and reallocate scientific feedback, an essential yet scarce resource for knowledge production. In a global large-scale randomized field experiment, we delivered customized LLM-generated feedback for over 31,000 arXiv preprints across 150 fields and more than 45,000 researchers from 133 geographic regions. Relative to controls, authors who received feedback had a significantly higher likelihood of revising their manuscripts, corresponding to a 12.55% relative increase over the baseline revision rate. Exposure to AI feedback also increased authors' subsequent use of LLM tools in their future papers, suggesting longer-run shifts in scientific practice. These effects were strongest among authors from non-English-dominant research regions, manuscripts less embedded in the scholarly literature, and teams with lower h-indexes and earlier career stages, consistent with the idea that AI feedback may provide the greatest benefit where access to timely critique is otherwise limited. Together, these findings provide causal evidence that structured AI-based interventions can transform access to scientific feedback from a largely private advantage into a more widely distributed resource, with broader implications for productivity, equity, and capacity across the global research system.

arXiv:2604.02289v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent multimodal large language models have achieved strong performance in unified text and image understanding and generation, yet extending such native capability to 3D remains challenging due to limited data. Compared to abundant 2D imagery, high-quality 3D assets are scarce, making 3D synthesis under-constrained. Existing methods often rely on indirect pipelines that edit in 2D and lift results into 3D via optimization, sacrificing geometric consistency. We present Omni123, a 3D-native foundation model that unifies text-to-2D and text-to-3D generation within a single autoregressive framework. Our key insight is that cross-modal consistency between images and 3D can serve as an implicit structural constraint. By representing text, images, and 3D as discrete tokens in a shared sequence space, the model leverages abundant 2D data as a geometric prior to improve 3D representations. We introduce an interleaved X-to-X training paradigm that coordinates diverse cross-modal tasks over heterogeneous paired datasets without requiring fully aligned text-image-3D triplets. By traversing semantic-visual-geometric cycles (e.g., text to image to 3D to image) within autoregressive sequences, the model jointly enforces semantic alignment, appearance fidelity, and multi-view geometric consistency. Experiments show that Omni123 significantly improves text-guided 3D generation and editing, demonstrating a scalable path toward multimodal 3D world models.

arXiv:2403.07183v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We present an approach for estimating the fraction of text in a large corpus which is likely to be substantially modified or produced by a large language model (LLM). Our maximum likelihood model leverages expert-written and AI-generated reference texts to accurately and efficiently examine real-world LLM-use at the corpus level. We apply this approach to a case study of scientific peer review in AI conferences that took place after the release of ChatGPT: ICLR 2024, NeurIPS 2023, CoRL 2023 and EMNLP 2023. Our results suggest that between 6.5% and 16.9% of text submitted as peer reviews to these conferences could have been substantially modified by LLMs, i.e. beyond spell-checking or minor writing updates. The circumstances in which generated text occurs offer insight into user behavior: the estimated fraction of LLM-generated text is higher in reviews which report lower confidence, were submitted close to the deadline, and from reviewers who are less likely to respond to author rebuttals. We also observe corpus-level trends in generated text which may be too subtle to detect at the individual level, and discuss the implications of such trends on peer review. We call for future interdisciplinary work to examine how LLM use is changing our information and knowledge practices.