Abstract
This chapter inquires how international multilateralism addresses the emergence of the general-purpose technology of Artificial Intelligence. In more detail, it analyses two key features of AI multilateralism: its generalized principles and the coordination of state relations in the realm of AI. Firstly, it distinguishes the generalized principles of AI multilateralism of epochal change, determinism, and dialectical understanding. In the second place, the adaptation of multilateralism to AI led to the integration of AI issues into the agendas of existing cooperation frameworks and the creation of new ad hoc frameworks focusing exclusively on AI issues. In both cases, AI multilateralism develops in the shadow of the state hierarchy in relations with other AI stakeholders. While AI multilateralism is multi-stakeholder, and the hierarchy between state and non-state actors may seem blurred, states preserve the competence as decisive decision-makers in agenda-setting, negotiation, and implementation of soft law international commitments.

Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into society, from financial services and traffic management to creative writing. Academic literature on the deployment of AI has mostly focused on the risks and harms that result from the use of AI. We introduce Fabric, a publicly available repository of deployed AI use cases to outline their governance mechanisms. Through semi-structured interviews with practitioners, we collect an initial set of 20 AI use cases. In addition, we co-design diagrams of the AI workflow with the practitioners. We discuss the oversight mechanisms and guardrails used in practice to safeguard AI use. The Fabric repository includes visual diagrams of AI use cases and descriptions of the deployed systems. Using the repository, we surface gaps in governance and find common patterns in human oversight of deployed AI systems. We intend for Fabric to serve as an extendable, evolving tool for researchers to study the effectiveness of AI governance.

Abstract
Large Language Models can emulate different writing styles, ranging from composing poetry that appears indistinguishable from that of famous poets to using slang that can convince people that they are chatting with a human online. While differences in style may not always be visible to the untrained eye, we can generally distinguish the writing of different people, like a linguistic fingerprint. This work examines whether a language model can also be linked to a specific fingerprint. Through stylometric and multidimensional register analyses, we compare human-authored and model-authored texts from different registers. We find that the model can successfully adapt its style depending on whether it is prompted to produce a Wikipedia entry vs. a college essay, but not in a way that makes it indistinguishable from humans. Concretely, the model shows more limited variation when producing outputs in different registers. Our results suggest that the model prefers nouns to verbs, thus showing a distinct linguistic backbone from humans, who tend to anchor language in the highly grammaticalized dimensions of tense, aspect, and mood. It is possible that the more complex domains of grammar reflect a mode of thought unique to humans, thus acting as a litmus test for Artificial Intelligence.

Abstract
This paper outlines the challenges and opportunities of research on conversational agents with children and young people across four countries, exploring the ways AI technologies can support children's well-being across social and cultural contexts.

Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into software engineering (SE) research and practice, yet their non-determinism, opaque training data, and evolving architectures complicate the reproduction and replication of empirical studies. We present a community effort to scope this space, introducing a taxonomy of LLM-based study types together with eight guidelines for designing and reporting empirical studies involving LLMs. The guidelines present essential (must) criteria as well as desired (should) criteria and target transparency throughout the research process. Our recommendations, contextualized by our study types, are: (1) to declare LLM usage and role; (2) to report model versions, configurations, and fine-tuning; (3) to document tool architectures; (4) to disclose prompts and interaction logs; (5) to use human validation; (6) to employ an open LLM as a baseline; (7) to report suitable baselines, benchmarks, and metrics; and (8) to openly articulate limitations and mitigations. Our goal is to enable reproducibility and replicability despite LLM-specific barriers to open science. We maintain the study types and guidelines online as a living resource for the community to use and shape (llm-guidelines.org).

Abstract
Recent advancements in natural language processing (NLP) have enabled the development of automated tools that support various domains, including software engineering. However, while NLP and artificial intelligence (AI) research has extensively focused on tasks such as code generation, less attention has been given to automating support for the adoption of best practices, the evolution of ways of working, and the monitoring of process health. This study addresses this gap by exploring the integration of Essence, a standard and thinking framework for managing software engineering practices, with large language models (LLMs). To this end, a specialised chatbot was developed to assist students and professionals in understanding and applying Essence. The chatbot employs a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system to retrieve relevant contextual information from a curated knowledge base. Four different LLMs were used to create multiple chatbot configurations, each evaluated both as a base model and augmented with the RAG system. The system performance was evaluated through both the relevance of retrieved context and the quality of generated responses. Comparative analysis against the general-purpose LLMs demonstrated that the proposed system consistently outperforms its baseline counterpart in domain-specific tasks. By facilitating access to structured software engineering knowledge, this work contributes to bridging the gap between theoretical frameworks and practical application, potentially improving process management and the adoption of software development practices. While further validation through user studies is required, these findings highlight the potential of LLM-based automation to enhance learning and decision-making in software engineering.

Abstract
As AI agents become more widely deployed, we are likely to see an increasing number of incidents: events involving AI agent use that directly or indirectly cause harm. For example, agents could be prompt-injected to exfiltrate private information or make unauthorized purchases. Structured information about such incidents (e.g., user prompts) can help us understand their causes and prevent future occurrences. However, existing incident reporting processes are not sufficient for understanding agent incidents. In particular, such processes are largely based on publicly available data, which excludes useful, but potentially sensitive, information such as an agent's chain of thought or browser history. To inform the development of new, emerging incident reporting processes, we propose an incident analysis framework for agents. Drawing on systems safety approaches, our framework proposes three types of factors that can cause incidents: system-related (e.g., CBRN training data), contextual (e.g., prompt injections), and cognitive (e.g., misunderstanding a user request). We also identify specific information that could help clarify which factors are relevant to a given incident: activity logs, system documentation and access, and information about the tools an agent uses. We provide recommendations for 1) what information incident reports should include and 2) what information developers and deployers should retain and make available to incident investigators upon request. As we transition to a world with more agents, understanding agent incidents will become increasingly crucial for managing risks.

Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a digital technology that will be of major importance for the development of humanity in the near future. AI has raised fundamental questions about what we should do with such systems, what the systems themselves should do, what risks they involve and how we can control these. - After the background to the field (1), this article introduces the main debates (2), first on ethical issues that arise with AI systems as objects, i.e. tools made and used by humans; here, the main sections are privacy (2.1), manipulation (2.2), opacity (2.3), bias (2.4), autonomy & responsibility (2.6) and the singularity (2.7). Then we look at AI systems as subjects, i.e. when ethics is for the AI systems themselves in machine ethics (2.8.) and artificial moral agency (2.9). Finally we look at future developments and the concept of AI (3). For each section within these themes, we provide a general explanation of the ethical issues, we outline existing positions and arguments, then we analyse how this plays out with current technologies and finally what policy consequences may be drawn.