Drug repurposing aims to identify new therapeutic uses for existing compounds and, compared with de novo drug discovery, offers a faster and more cost-effective path to clinical translation. However, the space of candidate drug–disease pairs is enormous and their underlying relationships often depend on complex multi-hop biological mechanisms, making it difficult to reliably predict which pairs represent true therapeutic relationships. Existing approaches tackle this from two directions: knowledge graph-based methods organize curated biomedical evidence into structured relational networks for grounded multi-hop reasoning, while LLM-based methods leverage pretrained knowledge to generate flexible mechanistic rationales. Yet neither is sufficient alone — KGs are confined to observed graph structure while LLMs lack factual grounding and risk hallucination. To address this gap, we propose DrugReason, a multi-view reasoning framework that integrates grounded KG reasoning with LLM-generated mechanistic inference for drug repurposing. DrugReason adaptively routes diverse reasoning paths to specialized experts conditioned on the query context, while a cross-expert distillation objective enables knowledge sharing without sacrificing expert specialization. Experiments on PharmaDB, DDInter, and DrugBank show that DrugReason improves average performance over strong single-view reasoning baselines and achieves competitive or superior results compared with graph-based alternatives, while providing interpretable routing-based predictions.

The ability to accurately identify authorship is crucial for verifying content authenticity and mitigating misinformation. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capacity for reasoning and problem-solving. However, their potential in authorship analysis remains under-explored. Traditional studies have depended on hand-crafted stylistic features, whereas state-of-the-art approaches leverage text embeddings from pre-trained language models. These methods, which typically require fine-tuning on labeled data, often suffer from performance degradation in cross-domain applications and provide limited explainability. This work seeks to address three research questions: (1) Can LLMs perform zero-shot, end-to-end authorship verification effectively? (2) Are LLMs capable of accurately attributing authorship among multiple candidates authors (e.g., 10 and 20)? (3) Can LLMs provide explainability in authorship analysis, particularly through the role of linguistic features? Moreover, we investigate the integration of explicit linguistic features to guide LLMs in their reasoning processes. Our assessment demonstrates LLMs’ proficiency in both tasks without the need for domain-specific fine-tuning, providing explanations into their decision making via a detailed analysis of linguistic features. This establishes a new benchmark for future research on LLM-based authorship analysis.