2025-04-18 | | Total: 24
Eradicating poverty is the first goal in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, aporophobia -- the societal bias against people living in poverty -- constitutes a major obstacle to designing, approving and implementing poverty-mitigation policies. This work presents an initial step towards operationalizing the concept of aporophobia to identify and track harmful beliefs and discriminative actions against poor people on social media. In close collaboration with non-profits and governmental organizations, we conduct data collection and exploration. Then we manually annotate a corpus of English tweets from five world regions for the presence of (1) direct expressions of aporophobia, and (2) statements referring to or criticizing aporophobic views or actions of others, to comprehensively characterize the social media discourse related to bias and discrimination against the poor. Based on the annotated data, we devise a taxonomy of categories of aporophobic attitudes and actions expressed through speech on social media. Finally, we train several classifiers and identify the main challenges for automatic detection of aporophobia in social networks. This work paves the way towards identifying, tracking, and mitigating aporophobic views on social media at scale.
The release of ChatGPT in late 2022 caused a flurry of activity and concern in the academic and educational communities. Some see the tool's ability to generate human-like text that passes at least cursory inspections for factual accuracy ``often enough'' a golden age of information retrieval and computer-assisted learning. Some, on the other hand, worry the tool may lead to unprecedented levels of academic dishonesty and cheating. In this work, we quantify some of the effects of the emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) on online education by analyzing a multi-year dataset of student essay responses from a free university-level MOOC on AI ethics. Our dataset includes essays submitted both before and after ChatGPT's release. We find that the launch of ChatGPT coincided with significant changes in both the length and style of student essays, mirroring observations in other contexts such as academic publishing. We also observe -- as expected based on related public discourse -- changes in prevalence of key content words related to AI and LLMs, but not necessarily the general themes or topics discussed in the student essays as identified through (dynamic) topic modeling.
International cooperation is common in AI research, including between geopolitical rivals. While many experts advocate for greater international cooperation on AI safety to address shared global risks, some view cooperation on AI with suspicion, arguing that it can pose unacceptable risks to national security. However, the extent to which cooperation on AI safety poses such risks, as well as provides benefits, depends on the specific area of cooperation. In this paper, we consider technical factors that impact the risks of international cooperation on AI safety research, focusing on the degree to which such cooperation can advance dangerous capabilities, result in the sharing of sensitive information, or provide opportunities for harm. We begin by why nations historically cooperate on strategic technologies and analyse current US-China cooperation in AI as a case study. We further argue that existing frameworks for managing associated risks can be supplemented with consideration of key risks specific to cooperation on technical AI safety research. Through our analysis, we find that research into AI verification mechanisms and shared protocols may be suitable areas for such cooperation. Through this analysis we aim to help researchers and governments identify and mitigate the risks of international cooperation on AI safety research, so that the benefits of cooperation can be fully realised.
Mass-shooting events pose a significant challenge to public safety, generating large volumes of unstructured textual data that hinder effective investigations and the formulation of public policy. Despite the urgency, few prior studies have effectively automated the extraction of key information from these events to support legal and investigative efforts. This paper presented the first dataset designed for knowledge acquisition on mass-shooting events through the application of named entity recognition (NER) techniques. It focuses on identifying key entities such as offenders, victims, locations, and criminal instruments, that are vital for legal and investigative purposes. The NER process is powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) using few-shot prompting, facilitating the efficient extraction and organization of critical information from diverse sources, including news articles, police reports, and social media. Experimental results on real-world mass-shooting corpora demonstrate that GPT-4o is the most effective model for mass-shooting NER, achieving the highest Micro Precision, Micro Recall, and Micro F1-scores. Meanwhile, o1-mini delivers competitive performance, making it a resource-efficient alternative for less complex NER tasks. It is also observed that increasing the shot count enhances the performance of all models, but the gains are more substantial for GPT-4o and o1-mini, highlighting their superior adaptability to few-shot learning scenarios.
This systematic literature review seeks to explain the mechanisms and implications of information disorder for public policy and the democratic process, by proposing a five-stage framework capturing its full life cycle. To our knowledge, no prior reviews in the field of public administration have offered a comprehensive, integrated model of information disorder; most existing studies are situated within communication, information science, or data science, and tend to focus on isolated aspects of the phenomenon. By connecting concepts and stages with enabling factors, agents, tactics and impacts, we reframe information disorder not as a question of "truthiness", individual cognition, digital literacy, or merely of technology, but as a socio-material phenomenon, deeply embedded in and shaped by the material conditions of contemporary digital society. This approach calls for a shift away from fragmented interventions toward more holistic, system-level policy responses.
Educators regularly use unsanctioned technologies (apps not formally approved by their institutions) for teaching, grading, and other academic tasks. While these tools often support instructional needs, they raise significant privacy, security, and regulatory compliance concerns. Despite its importance, understanding the adoptions and risks from the perspective of educators, who serve as de facto decision makers behind unsanctioned technology use, is largely understudied in existing literature.To address this gap, we conducted two surveys: one with 375 educators who listed 1,373 unsanctioned apps, and another with 21 administrators who either often help educators to set up educational technologies (EdTechs) or observe their security or privacy incidents. Our study identified 494 unique applications used by educators, primarily for pedagogical utility (n=213) and functional convenience (n=155), and the associated risks were often ignored. In fact, despite security and privacy concerns, many educators continued using the same apps (n = 62), citing a lack of alternatives or heavy dependence as barriers to discontinuation. We also found that fewer than a third of educators were aware of any institutional policy on unsanctioned technology use (K12: 30.3%, HEI: 24.8%), and 22 knowingly violated such policies. While 107 received formal warnings, only 33 adjusted their behavior. Finally, we conclude by discussing the implications of our findings and future recommendations to minimize the risks.
Social media bots are AI agents that participate in online conversations. Most studies focus on the general bot and the malicious nature of these agents. However, bots have many different personas, each specialized towards a specific behavioral or content trait. Neither are bots singularly bad, because they are used for both good and bad information dissemination. In this article, we introduce fifteen agent personas of social media bots. These personas have two main categories: Content-Based Bot Persona and Behavior-Based Bot Persona. We also form yardsticks of the good-bad duality of the bots, elaborating on metrics of good and bad bot agents. Our work puts forth a guideline to inform bot detection regulation, emphasizing that policies should focus on how these agents are employed, rather than collectively terming bot agents as bad.
Recent advances in generative Artificial Intelligence have raised public awareness, shaping expectations and concerns about their societal implications. Central to these debates is the question of AI alignment -- how well AI systems meet public expectations regarding safety, fairness, and social values. However, little is known about what people expect from AI-enabled systems and how these expectations differ across national contexts. We present evidence from two surveys of public preferences for key functional features of AI-enabled systems in Germany (n = 1800) and the United States (n = 1756). We examine support for four types of alignment in AI moderation: accuracy and reliability, safety, bias mitigation, and the promotion of aspirational imaginaries. U.S. respondents report significantly higher AI use and consistently greater support for all alignment features, reflecting broader technological openness and higher societal involvement with AI. In both countries, accuracy and safety enjoy the strongest support, while more normatively charged goals -- like fairness and aspirational imaginaries -- receive more cautious backing, particularly in Germany. We also explore how individual experience with AI, attitudes toward free speech, political ideology, partisan affiliation, and gender shape these preferences. AI use and free speech support explain more variation in Germany. In contrast, U.S. responses show greater attitudinal uniformity, suggesting that higher exposure to AI may consolidate public expectations. These findings contribute to debates on AI governance and cross-national variation in public preferences. More broadly, our study demonstrates the value of empirically grounding AI alignment debates in public attitudes and of explicitly developing normatively grounded expectations into theoretical and policy discussions on the governance of AI-generated content.
AI models are rapidly becoming embedded in all aspects of nuclear energy research and work but the safety, security, and safeguards consequences of this embedding are not well understood. In this paper, we call for the creation of an anticipatory system of governance for AI in the nuclear sector as well as the creation of a global AI observatory as a means for operationalizing anticipatory governance. The paper explores the contours of the nuclear AI observatory and an anticipatory system of governance by drawing on work in science and technology studies, public policy, and foresight studies.
From 2000 to 2015, the UN's Millennium Development Goals guided global priorities. The subsequent Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted a more dynamic approach, with annual indicator updates. As 2030 nears and progress lags, innovative acceleration strategies are critical. This study develops an AI-powered knowledge graph system to analyze SDG interconnections, discover potential new goals, and visualize them online. Using official SDG texts, Elsevier's keyword dataset, and 1,127 TED Talk transcripts (2020-2023), a pilot on 269 talks from 2023 applies AI-speculative design, large language models, and retrieval-augmented generation. Key findings include: (1) Heatmap analysis reveals strong associations between Goal 10 and Goal 16, and minimal coverage of Goal 6. (2) In the knowledge graph, simulated dialogue over time reveals new central nodes, showing how richer data supports divergent thinking and goal clarity. (3) Six potential new goals are proposed, centered on equity, resilience, and technology-driven inclusion. This speculative-AI framework offers fresh insights for policymakers and lays groundwork for future multimodal and cross-system SDG applications.
This study investigates the rapid growth and evolving network structure of Bluesky from August 2023 to February 2025. Through multiple waves of user migrations, the platform has reached a stable, persistently active user base. The growth process has given rise to a dense follower network with clustering and hub features that favor viral information diffusion. These developments highlight engagement and structural similarities between Bluesky and established platforms.
Decision-makers run the risk of relying too much on machine recommendations. Explainable AI, a common strategy for calibrating reliance, has mixed and even negative effects, such as increasing overreliance. To cognitively engage the decision-maker and to facilitate a deliberate decision-making process, we propose a potential `reflection machine' that supports critical reflection about the pending decision, including the machine recommendation. Reflection has been shown to improve critical thinking and reasoning, and thus decision-making. One way to stimulate reflection is to ask relevant questions. To systematically create questions, we present a question taxonomy inspired by Socratic questions and human-centred explainable AI. This taxonomy can contribute to the design of such a `reflection machine' that asks decision-makers questions. Our work is part of the growing research on human-machine collaborations that goes beyond the paradigm of machine recommendations and explanations, and aims to enable greater human oversight as required by the European AI Act.
This study explored how large language models (LLMs) perform in two areas related to art: writing critiques of artworks and reasoning about mental states (Theory of Mind, or ToM) in art-related situations. For the critique generation part, we built a system that combines Noel Carroll's evaluative framework with a broad selection of art criticism theories. The model was prompted to first write a full-length critique and then shorter, more coherent versions using a step-by-step prompting process. These AI-generated critiques were then compared with those written by human experts in a Turing test-style evaluation. In many cases, human subjects had difficulty telling which was which, and the results suggest that LLMs can produce critiques that are not only plausible in style but also rich in interpretation, as long as they are carefully guided. In the second part, we introduced new simple ToM tasks based on situations involving interpretation, emotion, and moral tension, which can appear in the context of art. These go beyond standard false-belief tests and allow for more complex, socially embedded forms of reasoning. We tested 41 recent LLMs and found that their performance varied across tasks and models. In particular, tasks that involved affective or ambiguous situations tended to reveal clearer differences. Taken together, these results help clarify how LLMs respond to complex interpretative challenges, revealing both their cognitive limitations and potential. While our findings do not directly contradict the so-called Generative AI Paradox--the idea that LLMs can produce expert-like output without genuine understanding--they suggest that, depending on how LLMs are instructed, such as through carefully designed prompts, these models may begin to show behaviors that resemble understanding more closely than we might assume.
Enhancing emotional well-being has become a significant focus in HCI and CSCW, with technologies increasingly designed to track, visualize, and manage emotions. However, these approaches have faced criticism for potentially suppressing certain emotional experiences. Through a scoping review of 53 empirical studies from ACM proceedings implementing Technology-Mediated Emotion Intervention (TMEI), we critically examine current practices through lenses drawn from HCI critical theories. Our analysis reveals emotion intervention mechanisms that extend beyond traditional emotion regulation paradigms, identifying care-centered goals that prioritize non-judgmental emotional support and preserve users' identities. The findings demonstrate how researchers design technologies for generating artificial care, intervening in power dynamics, and nudging behavioral changes. We contribute the concept of "emotion support" as an alternative approach to "emotion regulation," emphasizing human-centered approaches to emotional well-being. This work advances the understanding of diverse human emotional needs beyond individual and cognitive perspectives, offering design implications that critically reimagine how technologies can honor emotional complexity, preserve human agency, and transform power dynamics in care contexts.
This study critically examines the commonly held assumption that explicability in artificial intelligence (AI) systems inherently boosts user trust. Utilizing a meta-analytical approach, we conducted a comprehensive examination of the existing literature to explore the relationship between AI explainability and trust. Our analysis, incorporating data from 90 studies, reveals a statistically significant but moderate positive correlation between the explainability of AI systems and the trust they engender among users. This indicates that while explainability contributes to building trust, it is not the sole or predominant factor in this equation. In addition to academic contributions to the field of Explainable AI (XAI), this research highlights its broader socio-technical implications, particularly in promoting accountability and fostering user trust in critical domains such as healthcare and justice. By addressing challenges like algorithmic bias and ethical transparency, the study underscores the need for equitable and sustainable AI adoption. Rather than focusing solely on immediate trust, we emphasize the normative importance of fostering authentic and enduring trustworthiness in AI systems.
How do we interpret the differential privacy (DP) guarantee for network data? We take a deep dive into a popular form of network DP ($\varepsilon$--edge DP) to find that many of its common interpretations are flawed. Drawing on prior work for privacy with correlated data, we interpret DP through the lens of adversarial hypothesis testing and demonstrate a gap between the pairs of hypotheses actually protected under DP (tests of complete networks) and the sorts of hypotheses implied to be protected by common claims (tests of individual edges). We demonstrate some conditions under which this gap can be bridged, while leaving some questions open. While some discussion is specific to edge DP, we offer selected results in terms of abstract DP definitions and provide discussion of the implications for other forms of network DP.
Working with documents is a key part of almost any knowledge work, from contextualizing research in a literature review to reviewing legal precedent. Recently, as their capabilities have expanded, primarily text-based NLP systems have often been billed as able to assist or even automate this kind of work. But to what extent are these systems able to model these tasks as experts conceptualize and perform them now? In this study, we interview sixteen domain experts across two domains to understand their processes of document research, and compare it to the current state of NLP systems. We find that our participants processes are idiosyncratic, iterative, and rely extensively on the social context of a document in addition its content; existing approaches in NLP and adjacent fields that explicitly center the document as an object, rather than as merely a container for text, tend to better reflect our participants' priorities, though they are often less accessible outside their research communities. We call on the NLP community to more carefully consider the role of the document in building useful tools that are accessible, personalizable, iterative, and socially aware.
Blockchains and peer-to-peer systems are part of a trend towards computer systems that are "radically decentralised", by which we mean that they 1) run across many participants, 2) without central control, and 3) are such that qualities 1 and 2 are essential to the system's intended use cases. We propose a notion of topological space, which we call a "semitopology", to help us mathematically model such systems. We treat participants as points in a space, which are organised into "actionable coalitions". An actionable coalition is any set of participants who collectively have the resources to collaborate (if they choose) to progress according to the system's rules, without involving any other participants in the system. It turns out that much useful information about the system can be obtained \emph{just} by viewing it as a semitopology and studying its actionable coalitions. For example: we will prove a mathematical sense in which if every actionable coalition of some point p has nonempty intersection with every actionable coalition of another point q -- note that this is the negation of the famous Hausdorff separation property from topology -- then p and q must remain in agreement. This is of practical interest, because remaining in agreement is a key correctness property in many distributed systems. For example in blockchain, participants disagreeing is called "forking", and blockchain designers try hard to avoid it. We provide an accessible introduction to: the technical context of decentralised systems; why we build them and find them useful; how they motivate the theory of semitopological spaces; and we sketch some basic theorems and applications of the resulting mathematics.
Training a state-of-the-art Large Language Model (LLM) is an increasingly expensive endeavor due to growing computational, hardware, energy, and engineering demands. Yet, an often-overlooked (and seldom paid) expense is the human labor behind these models' training data. Every LLM is built on an unfathomable amount of human effort: trillions of carefully written words sourced from books, academic papers, codebases, social media, and more. This position paper aims to assign a monetary value to this labor and argues that the most expensive part of producing an LLM should be the compensation provided to training data producers for their work. To support this position, we study 64 LLMs released between 2016 and 2024, estimating what it would cost to pay people to produce their training datasets from scratch. Even under highly conservative estimates of wage rates, the costs of these models' training datasets are 10-1000 times larger than the costs to train the models themselves, representing a significant financial liability for LLM providers. In the face of the massive gap between the value of training data and the lack of compensation for its creation, we highlight and discuss research directions that could enable fairer practices in the future.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing promise in educational settings, yet their mathematical reasoning has been considered evolving. This study evaluates the mathematical capabilities of various LLMs using the Finnish matriculation examination, a high-stakes digital test for upper secondary education. Initial tests yielded moderate performance corresponding to mid-range grades, but later evaluations demonstrated substantial improvements as the language models evolved. Remarkably, some models achieved near-perfect or perfect scores, matching top student performance and qualifying for university admission. Our findings highlight the rapid advances in the mathematical proficiency of LLMs and illustrate their potential to also support educational assessments at scale.
Urban causal research is essential for understanding the complex dynamics of cities and informing evidence-based policies. However, it is challenged by the inefficiency and bias of hypothesis generation, barriers to multimodal data complexity, and the methodological fragility of causal experimentation. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) present an opportunity to rethink how urban causal analysis is conducted. This Perspective examines current urban causal research by analyzing taxonomies that categorize research topics, data sources, and methodological approaches to identify structural gaps. We then introduce an LLM-driven conceptual framework, AutoUrbanCI, composed of four distinct modular agents responsible for hypothesis generation, data engineering, experiment design and execution, and results interpretation with policy recommendations. We propose evaluation criteria for rigor and transparency and reflect on implications for human-AI collaboration, equity, and accountability. We call for a new research agenda that embraces AI-augmented workflows not as replacements for human expertise but as tools to broaden participation, improve reproducibility, and unlock more inclusive forms of urban causal reasoning.
The emergence of generative AI chatbots such as ChatGPT has prompted growing public and academic interest in their role as informal mental health support tools. While early rule-based systems have been around for several years, large language models (LLMs) offer new capabilities in conversational fluency, empathy simulation, and availability. This study explores how users engage with LLMs as mental health tools by analyzing over 10,000 TikTok comments from videos referencing LLMs as mental health tools. Using a self-developed tiered coding schema and supervised classification models, we identify user experiences, attitudes, and recurring themes. Results show that nearly 20% of comments reflect personal use, with these users expressing overwhelmingly positive attitudes. Commonly cited benefits include accessibility, emotional support, and perceived therapeutic value. However, concerns around privacy, generic responses, and the lack of professional oversight remain prominent. It is important to note that the user feedback does not indicate which therapeutic framework, if any, the LLM-generated output aligns with. While the findings underscore the growing relevance of AI in everyday practices, they also highlight the urgent need for clinical and ethical scrutiny in the use of AI for mental health support.
Users of Large Language Models (LLMs) often perceive these models as intelligent entities with human-like capabilities. However, the extent to which LLMs' capabilities truly approximate human abilities remains a topic of debate. In this paper, to characterize the capabilities of LLMs in relation to human capabilities, we collected performance data from over 80 models across 37 evaluation benchmarks. The evaluation benchmarks are categorized into 6 primary abilities and 11 sub-abilities in human aspect. Then, we then clustered the performance rankings into several categories and compared these clustering results with classifications based on human ability aspects. Our findings lead to the following conclusions: 1. We have confirmed that certain capabilities of LLMs with fewer than 10 billion parameters can indeed be described using human ability metrics; 2. While some abilities are considered interrelated in humans, they appear nearly uncorrelated in LLMs; 3. The capabilities possessed by LLMs vary significantly with the parameter scale of the model.
Privacy Masking is a critical concept under data privacy involving anonymization and de-anonymization of personally identifiable information (PII). Privacy masking techniques rely on Named Entity Recognition (NER) approaches under NLP support in identifying and classifying named entities in each text. NER approaches, however, have several limitations including (a) content sensitivity including ambiguous, polysemic, context dependent or domain specific content, (b) phrasing variabilities including nicknames and alias, informal expressions, alternative representations, emerging expressions, evolving naming conventions and (c) formats or syntax variations, typos, misspellings. However, there are a couple of PII datasets that have been widely used by researchers and the open-source community to train models on PII detection or masking. These datasets have been used to train models including Piiranha and Starpii, which have been downloaded over 300k and 580k times on HuggingFace. We examine the quality of the PII masking by these models given the limitations of the datasets and of the NER approaches. We curate a dataset of 17K unique, semi-synthetic sentences containing 16 types of PII by compiling information from across multiple jurisdictions including India, U.K and U.S. We generate sentences (using language models) containing these PII at five different NER detection feature dimensions - (1) Basic Entity Recognition, (2) Contextual Entity Disambiguation, (3) NER in Noisy & Real-World Data, (4) Evolving & Novel Entities Detection and (5) Cross-Lingual or multi-lingual NER) and 1 in adversarial context. We present the results and exhibit the privacy exposure caused by such model use (considering the extent of lifetime downloads of these models). We conclude by highlighting the gaps in measuring performance of the models and the need for contextual disclosure in model cards for such models.