Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in collaborative settings, yet little is known about how they coordinate when treated as black-box agents. We simulate 7,500 multi-agent, multi-round discussions in an inductive coding task, generating over 125,000 utterances that capture both final annotations and their interactional histories. We introduce process-level metrics—code stability, semantic self-consistency, and lexical confidence—alongside sentiment and convergence measures, to track coordination dynamics. To probe deeper alignment signals, we analyze the evolving geometry of output embeddings, showing that intrinsic dimensionality declines over rounds, suggesting semantic compression. The results reveal that LLM groups converge lexically and semantically, develop asymmetric influence patterns, and exhibit negotiation-like behaviors despite the absence of explicit role prompting. This work demonstrates how black-box interaction analysis can surface emergent coordination strategies, offering a scalable complement to internal probe-based interpretability methods.

This paper investigates the automation of qualitative data analysis, focusing on inductive coding using large language models (LLMs). Unlike traditional approaches that rely on deductive methods with predefined labels, this research investigates the inductive process where labels emerge from the data. The study evaluates the performance of six open-source LLMs compared to human experts. As part of the evaluation, experts rated the perceived difficulty of the quotes they coded. The results reveal a peculiar dichotomy: human coders consistently perform well when labeling complex sentences but struggle with simpler ones, while LLMs exhibit the opposite trend. Additionally, the study explores systematic deviations in both human and LLM-generated labels by comparing them to the golden standard from the test set. While human annotations may sometimes differ from the golden standard, they are often rated more favorably by other humans. In contrast, some LLMs demonstrate closer alignment with the true labels but receive lower evaluations from experts.

This PhD proposal aims to investigate ways of automating qualitative data analysis, specifically the thematic coding of texts. Despite existing methods vastly covered in literature, they mainly use Topic Modeling and other quantitative approaches which are far from resembling a human’s analysis outcome. This proposal examines the limitations of current research in the field. It proposes a novel methodology based on Large Language Models to tackle automated coding and make it as close as possible to the results of human researchers. This paper covers studies already done in this field and their limitations, existing software, the problem of duplicating the researcher bias, and the proposed methodology.