This work investigates the ability of large language models (LLMs) to generate mathematical equations from scientific texts. Prior work faces challenges in unstructured grounding, multi-equation dependency, and human-aligned evaluation. To address this, we construct a dataset of AI research papers, pairing contextual passages with ground-truth equations and variable descriptions. We develop an explainable equation generation workflow and evaluate it across diverse open- and closed-source LLMs. Our evaluation protocol combines automatic metrics, LLM-based rubrics, and human judgments to assess accuracy, explainability, and human-LLM alignment. Results show that LLMs achieve moderate performance on lexical and syntactic similarity, but struggle with semantic accuracy. LLM-based evaluations show limited alignment with human judgments, highlighting challenges in assessing equation quality. These findings provide insights for improving equation generation models and developing more reliable evaluation methods for scientific creativity. We provide code and data for reproducibility.

Recent state-of-the-art recommender systems predominantly rely on either implicit or explicit feedback from users to suggest new items. While effective in recommending novel options, many recommender systems often use uninterpretable embeddings to represent user preferences. This lack of transparency not only limits user understanding of why certain items are suggested but also reduces the user’s ability to scrutinize and modify their preferences, thereby affecting their ability to receive a list of preferred recommendations. Given the recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs), we investigate how a properly crafted prompt can be used to summarize a user’s preferences from past reviews and recommend items based only on language-based preferences. In particular, we study how LLMs can be prompted to generate a natural language (NL) user profile that holistically describe a user’s preferences. These NL profiles can then be leveraged to fine-tune a LLM using only NL profiles to make transparent and scrutable recommendations. Furthermore, we validate the scrutability of our user profile-based recommender by investigating the impact on recommendation changes after editing NL user profiles. According to our evaluations of the model’s rating prediction performance on two benchmarking rating prediction datasets, we observe that this novel approach maintains a performance level on par with established recommender systems in a warm-start setting. With a systematic analysis into the effect of updating user profiles and system prompts, we show the advantage of our approach in easier adjustment of user preferences and a greater autonomy over users’ received recommendations.