Who Gets Heeded? An Obligation-Level Audit of Responsiveness in EPA Rulemaking

Notice-and-comment rulemaking gives any affected party the same formal right to influence federal regulation, but formal access is not substantive capacity to shape rule text. Existing strategies operate at the rule or aggregate-corpus level, too coarse to capture the discrete regulatory obligations where commenters seek change. We introduce obligation-level responsiveness auditing, an auditable, AI-assisted framework for measuring whether public-comment engagement co-occurs with changes to specific regulatory duties. The framework extracts proposed and final-rule obligations, matches comments to the obligations they address, and classifies proposed-final outcomes; each load-bearing component is evaluated against blind human judgment. We apply the framework to 70,075 comments across 36 EPA anchor rulemakings, drawn from a corpus of 786,197 comments across 6,145 dockets from 2010-2022. Three descriptive findings emerge. First, engagement is associated with revision at a modest within-docket magnitude. Second, support-versus-opposition direction does not clearly differentiate outcomes, an informative null inconsistent with simple preference-aggregation. Third, under a permissive reconstruction of commenter type, organizational-majority engagement concentrates in editorial-refinement rather than substantive-modification outcomes at the cross-docket level. A blind human audit of the load-bearing outcome contrast preserves this third finding under corrected labels and reveals that text-similarity methods are insufficient for distinguishing editorial from substantive regulatory change, a measurement-validity lesson we treat as a supporting methodological contribution. Together, these findings locate the equity asymmetry upstream of agency response: in differential capacity across commenter populations to identify, interpret, and contest specific legal obligations.

Predicting Startup Exit from Textual Descriptors - A Computational Linguistics Framework

This study shows that textual descriptors alone can predict early-stage startup success, defined as Exit, without relying on contextual, financial, or human capital variables. Using venture capital-curated datasets covering 7,419 startups over 20 years, the research isolates text-based framing variables and engineers 850 features through startup narrative mapping. Data subsets and vector embeddings are evaluated for statistical significance, followed by supervised machine learning experiments across six models. LightGBM achieved the highest predictive performance (F1 = 0.48), while textual descriptors alone achieved F1 = 0.30, confirming the standalone predictive value of founder narratives. Feature analysis shows that optimized densities of hyping markers, including adjectives, jargon, and buzzwords, are associated with higher Exit probability, whereas excessive statement or name length reduces it. The study also introduces a quantifiable Hyping Score for venture capital applications, demonstrating that startup framing provides measurable signals for predicting Exit under conditions of high information asymmetry.

Using Fine-Tuned LLMs to Identify Indicators of Vulnerability in UK Police Incident Logs

Purpose: Understanding how much of routine policing involves vulnerable people could inform resourcing, training, and multi-agency response, yet administrative data provide limited insight. We explore whether an LLM-based classification pipeline, developed on open-source US police data, can be adapted to estimate the prevalence of four vulnerability indicators - mental ill health, substance misuse, alcohol dependence, and homelessness - in UK police incident narratives, and when outputs can be treated as defensible measurements. Methods: We analyse nearly 3,000 de-identified incident logs from a UK police force, using a multi-stage pipeline combining repeated model inference, label aggregation, structured human review, and statistical correction. The pipeline runs on a locally hosted open-weight LLM, reflecting the secure environments police must work in. Results: LLMs can produce meaningful, if imperfect, prevalence estimates at scale. Mental ill health indicators are present in approximately one in five incidents, with lower prevalence for other indicators. However, naive LLM deployment is unreliable: single-pass classifications are unstable, and aggregated outputs systematically over-assign indicators relative to human judgement. Correcting these biases required substantial human input and statistical adjustment, leaving considerable uncertainty. Conclusions: While LLMs can extract information from unstructured police data, their outputs cannot be treated as valid measurements without careful methodological support. At the population level, defensible estimates are achievable but resource-intensive; at the individual level, errors remain frequent and unpredictable, limiting suitability for operational decisions. This study highlights both the potential and the constraints of LLM-based measurement in applied settings.

From Complaint Narratives to Monetary Relief: A Hybrid Machine Learning Framework for CFPB Consumer Complaints

Consumer financial complaints provide a valuable source of information for identifying service failures, dispute frictions, and operational deficiencies in consumer-facing financial institutions. This paper proposes a hybrid machine learning framework for predicting monetary relief outcomes using Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint data. We formulate the task as an imbalanced binary classification problem, where complaints closed with monetary relief are treated as compensable outcomes. The proposed framework integrates multiple sources of predictive information, including complaint narrative text, LDA-based topic representations, interpretable text-engineered features, and structured categorical attributes such as company and state. An XGBoost classifier is trained using a temporal train-test split, with earlier complaints used for model development and more recent complaints reserved for out-of-sample evaluation. Compared with a TF-IDF baseline, the proposed framework substantially improves predictive performance, increasing AUC-ROC from 0.69 to 0.78 and improving PR-AUC under class imbalance. Feature importance analysis shows that textual signals, latent complaint topics, and company identity all contribute meaningful predictive information. In particular, company-level effects reveal systematic variation in complaint resolution patterns across financial institutions. These findings suggest that consumer complaint narratives can serve as alternative data for monitoring consumer harm, identifying firm-level operational weaknesses, and supporting early-stage risk surveillance in consumer finance.