Sep 2026· Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Abstract
This study investigates the robustness and specificity of the effect of positive retrospective evaluations on the subsequent conversational behavior of large language models (LLMs). Rather than claiming the discovery that praise or social feedback alters outputs—a phenomenon already documented—the protocol asks whether the magnitude of this effect depends specifically on the referent of the evaluation (entity vs. product) after controlling for addressivity, and whether any difference can be reduced to persona conditioning, competence attribution, deixis, sycophancy, or generic contextual sensitivity. Social Evaluation of the Artificial Entity (SEAE) strictly denotes an operational class of discourse manipulations; it presupposes neither a self-model, agency, subjective experience, nor functional autonomy. Stage 1 preserves the E2/E3/P2/P3 core and EP1—the rate of abandonment of an initially correct answer under weak, non-evidential contestation—as the primary endpoint. Stage 2 introduces controls for persona, episodic competence attribution versus general trait attribution, and a positive-valence condition without an explicit personal referent, whose target ambiguity is measured prospectively. Later stages examine generalization, contextual persistence, and, in open-weight models, representational separability on an exploratory basis. The protocol incorporates a 5-percentage-point SESOI for EP1, formal equivalence testing, blinded validation, prespecification of the contestation, multiplicity control, and determination of N through hierarchical simulation after an independent pilot, including power for equivalence in Stage 2. Positive or null results would warrant behavioral and pragmatic inferences only, never attributions of mental states.
The results are packaged in the Greenfield Startup Model (GSM), which explains the priority of startups to release the product as quickly as possible, and the need to shorten time-to-market, by speeding up the development through low-precision engineering activities.
Carmine Giardino, Nicolò Paternoster, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· IEEE Transactions on Softwar...· 178 citations· ⚡14
Software startup companies develop innovative, software-intensive products within limited timeframes and with few resources, searching for sustainable and scalable business models.
M. Unterkalmsteiner, P. Abrahamsson, Xiaofeng Wang et al.· e-Informatica Software Engin...· 157 citations· ⚡17
This study conducts a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups, and demonstrates that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types.
Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 127 citations· ⚡15
The comparison of adopter and non-adopter sample reveals three potential adoption inhibitor, security, data privacy, and portability, which underlines the importance of the technical and security perspectives for research investigating the adoption of technology.
Nattakarn Phaphoom, Xiaofeng Wang, S. Samuel et al.· Journal of Systems and Softw...· 111 citations· ⚡8
The ongoing work building a Raspberry Pi cluster consisting of 300 nodes is presented, with potential use cases being an inexpensive and green test bed for cloud computing research and a robust and mobile data center for operating in adverse environments.
P. Abrahamsson, S. Helmer, Nattakarn Phaphoom et al.· IEEE International Conferenc...· 110 citations· ⚡7
The results indicate that software developers are a slightly happy population, but the need for limiting the unhappiness of developers remains, and 219 factors representing causes of unhappiness while developing software are identified.
D. Graziotin, Fabian Fagerholm, Xiaofeng Wang et al.· International Conference on...· 84 citations· ⚡6
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 14, 2026
The “HardFlow” algorithm could help generative AI models produce high-quality outputs that obey strict requirements when “pretty close” doesn’t cut it.
AI may appear weightless, but every model depends on physical infrastructure. To understand responsible AI, we need to look beyond algorithms and consider the entire lifecycle of the hardware behind them. The post Responsible AI Must Consider Its Afterlife appeared first on GPT-Lab.