Search

Recent debates raised concerns that language models may favor certain viewpoints. But what if the solution is not to aim for a 'view from nowhere' but rather to leverage different viewpoints? We introduce Plurals, a system and Python library for pluralistic AI deliberation. Plurals consists of Agents (LLMs, optionally with personas) which deliberate within customizable Structures, with Moderators overseeing deliberation. Plurals is a generator of simulated social ensembles. Plurals integrates with government datasets to create nationally representative personas, includes deliberation templates inspired by democratic deliberation theory, and allows users to customize both information-sharing structures and deliberation behavior within Structures. Six case studies demonstrate fidelity to theoretical constructs and efficacy. Three randomized experiments show simulated focus groups produced output resonant with an online sample of the relevant audiences (chosen over zero-shot generation in 75% of trials). Plurals is both a paradigm and a concrete system for pluralistic AI. The Plurals library is available at https://github.com/josh-ashkinaze/plurals and will be continually updated.

Non-consensual intimate media (NCIM) presents internet-scale harm to individuals who are depicted. One of the most powerful tools for requesting its removal is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). However, the DMCA was designed to protect copyright holders rather than to address the problem of NCIM. Using a dataset of more than 54,000 DMCA reports and over 85 million infringing URLs spanning over a decade, this paper evaluates the efficacy of the DMCA for NCIM takedown. Results show less than 50% of infringing URLs are removed from website hosts in 60 days, and Google Search takes a median of 11.7 days to deindex infringing content. Across web hosts, only 4% of URLs are removed within the first 48 hours. Additionally, the most frequently reported domains for non-commercial NCIM are smaller websites, not large platforms. We stress the need for new laws that ensure a shorter time to takedown that are enforceable across big and small platforms alike., Comment: under review

Non-consensual intimate media (NCIM) inflicts significant harm. Currently, victim-survivors can use two mechanisms to report NCIM - as a non-consensual nudity violation or as copyright infringement. We conducted an audit study of takedown speed of NCIM reported to X (formerly Twitter) of both mechanisms. We uploaded 50 AI-generated nude images and reported half under X's "non-consensual nudity" reporting mechanism and half under its "copyright infringement" mechanism. The copyright condition resulted in successful image removal within 25 hours for all images (100% removal rate), while non-consensual nudity reports resulted in no image removal for over three weeks (0% removal rate). We stress the need for targeted legislation to regulate NCIM removal online. We also discuss ethical considerations for auditing NCIM on social platforms., Comment: under review

How do Wikipedians maintain an accurate encyclopedia during an ongoing geopolitical conflict where state actors might seek to spread disinformation or conduct an information operation? In the context of the Russia-Ukraine War, this question becomes more pressing, given the Russian government's extensive history of orchestrating information campaigns. We conducted an interview study with 13 expert Wikipedians involved in the Russo-Ukrainian War topic area on the English-language edition of Wikipedia. While our participants did not perceive there to be clear evidence of a state-backed information operation, they agreed that war-related articles experienced high levels of disruptive editing from both Russia-aligned and Ukraine-aligned accounts. The English-language edition of Wikipedia had existing policies and processes at its disposal to counter such disruption. State-backed or not, the disruptive activity created time-intensive maintenance work for our participants. Finally, participants considered English-language Wikipedia to be more resilient than social media in preventing the spread of false information online. We conclude by discussing sociotechnical implications for Wikipedia and social platforms.

Large language models (LLMs) are trained on broad corpora and then used in communities with specialized norms. Is providing LLMs with community rules enough for models to follow these norms? We evaluate LLMs' capacity to detect (Task 1) and correct (Task 2) biased Wikipedia edits according to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy. LLMs struggled with bias detection, achieving only 64% accuracy on a balanced dataset. Models exhibited contrasting biases (some under- and others over-predicted bias), suggesting distinct priors about neutrality. LLMs performed better at generation, removing 79% of words removed by Wikipedia editors. However, LLMs made additional changes beyond Wikipedia editors' simpler neutralizations, resulting in high-recall but low-precision editing. Interestingly, crowdworkers rated AI rewrites as more neutral (70%) and fluent (61%) than Wikipedia-editor rewrites. Qualitative analysis found LLMs sometimes applied NPOV more comprehensively than Wikipedia editors but often made extraneous non-NPOV-related changes (such as grammar). LLMs may apply rules in ways that resonate with the public but diverge from community experts. While potentially effective for generation, LLMs may reduce editor agency and increase moderation workload (e.g., verifying additions). Even when rules are easy to articulate, having LLMs apply them like community members may still be difficult.

Non-consensual intimate media (NCIM) involves sharing intimate content without the depicted person's consent, including "revenge porn" and sexually explicit deepfakes. While NCIM has received attention in legal, psychological, and communication fields over the past decade, it is not sufficiently addressed in computing scholarship. This paper addresses this gap by linking NCIM harms to the specific technological components that facilitate them. We introduce the sociotechnical stack, a conceptual framework designed to map the technical stack to its corresponding social impacts. The sociotechnical stack allows us to analyze sociotechnical problems like NCIM, and points toward opportunities for computing research. We propose a research roadmap for computing and social computing communities to deter NCIM perpetration and support victim-survivors through building and rebuilding technologies., Comment: Accepted CSCW 2024

This article argues that AI Alignment is a type of Human-Centered Computing.

Non-consensual Intimate Media (NCIM) refers to the distribution of sexual or intimate content without consent. NCIM is common and causes significant emotional, financial, and reputational harm. We developed Hands-Off, an interaction technique for messaging applications that deters non-consensual screenshots. Hands-Off requires recipients to perform a hand gesture in the air, above the device, to unlock media -- which makes simultaneous screenshotting difficult. A lab study shows that Hands-Off gestures are easy to perform and reduce non-consensual screenshots by 67 percent. We conclude by generalizing this approach and introduce the idea of Feminist Interaction Techniques (FIT), interaction techniques that encode feminist values and speak to societal problems, and reflect on FIT's opportunities and limitations., Comment: Accepted UIST 2024

Social technologies are the systems, interfaces, features, infrastructures, and architectures that allow people to interact with each other online. These technologies dramatically shape the fabric of our everyday lives, from the information we consume to the people we interact with to the foundations of our culture and politics. While the benefits of social technologies are well documented, the harms, too, have cast a long shadow. To address widespread problems like harassment, disinformation, information access, and mental health concerns, we need to rethink the foundations of how social technologies are designed, sustained, and governed. This report is based on discussions at the Computing Community Consortium Workshop, The Future of Research on Social Technologies, that was held November 2-3, 2023 in Washington, DC. The visioning workshop came together to focus on two questions. What should we know about social technologies, and what is needed to get there? The workshop brought together over 50 information and computer scientists, social scientists, communication and journalism scholars, and policy experts. We used a discussion format, with one day of guiding topics and a second day using an unconference model where participants created discussion topics. The interdisciplinary group of attendees discussed gaps in existing scholarship and the methods, resources, access, and collective effort needed to address those gaps. We also discussed approaches for translating scholarship for various audiences including citizens, funders, educators, industry professionals, and policymakers. This report presents a synthesis of major themes during our discussions. The themes presented are not a summary of what we know already, they are an exploration of what we do not know enough about, and what we should spend more effort and investment on in the coming years.

Exposure to large language model output is rapidly increasing. How will seeing AI-generated ideas affect human ideas? We conducted an experiment (800+ participants, 40+ countries) where participants viewed creative ideas that were from ChatGPT or prior experimental participants and then brainstormed their own idea. We varied the number of AI-generated examples (none, low, or high exposure) and if the examples were labeled as 'AI' (disclosure). Our dynamic experiment design -- ideas from prior participants in an experimental condition are used as stimuli for future participants in the same experimental condition -- speaks to the interdependent process of cultural creation: creative ideas are built upon prior ideas. Hence, we capture the compounding effects of having LLMs 'in the culture loop'. We find that high AI exposure (but not low AI exposure) did not affect the creativity of individual ideas but did increase the average amount and rate of change of collective idea diversity. AI made ideas different, not better. There were no main effects of disclosure. We also found that self-reported creative people were less influenced by knowing an idea was from AI and that participants may knowingly adopt AI ideas when the task is difficult. Our findings suggest that introducing AI ideas may increase collective diversity but not individual creativity.

Many studies explore how people 'come into' misinformation exposure. But much less is known about how people 'come out of' misinformation exposure. Do people organically sever ties to misinformation spreaders? And what predicts doing so? Over six months, we tracked the frequency and predictors of ~900K followers unfollowing ~5K health misinformation spreaders on Twitter. We found that misinformation ties are persistent. Monthly unfollowing rates are just 0.52%. In other words, 99.5% of misinformation ties persist each month. Users are also 31% more likely to unfollow non-misinformation spreaders than they are to unfollow misinformation spreaders. Although generally infrequent, the factors most associated with unfollowing misinformation spreaders are (1) redundancy and (2) ideology. First, users initially following many spreaders, or who follow spreaders that tweet often, are most likely to unfollow later. Second, liberals are more likely to unfollow than conservatives. Overall, we observe a strong persistence of misinformation ties. The fact that users rarely unfollow misinformation spreaders suggests a need for external nudges and the importance of preventing exposure from arising in the first place., Comment: WWW 2024

Social media platforms aspire to create online experiences where users can participate safely and equitably. However, women around the world experience widespread online harassment, including insults, stalking, aggression, threats, and non-consensual sharing of sexual photos. This article describes women's perceptions of harm associated with online harassment and preferred platform responses to that harm. We conducted a survey in 14 geographic regions around the world (N = 3,993), focusing on regions whose perspectives have been insufficiently elevated in social media governance decisions (e.g. Mongolia, Cameroon). {Results show} that, on average, women perceive greater harm associated with online harassment than men, especially for non-consensual image sharing. Women also prefer most platform responses compared to men, especially removing content and banning users; however, women are less favorable towards payment as a response. Addressing global gender-based violence online requires understanding how women experience online harms and how they wish for it to be addressed. This is especially important given that the people who build and govern technology are not typically those who are most likely to experience online harms.

Understanding how ML models work is a prerequisite for responsibly designing, deploying, and using ML-based systems. With interpretability approaches, ML can now offer explanations for its outputs to aid human understanding. Though these approaches rely on guidelines for how humans explain things to each other, they ultimately solve for improving the artifact -- an explanation. In this paper, we propose an alternate framework for interpretability grounded in Weick's sensemaking theory, which focuses on who the explanation is intended for. Recent work has advocated for the importance of understanding stakeholders' needs -- we build on this by providing concrete properties (e.g., identity, social context, environmental cues, etc.) that shape human understanding. We use an application of sensemaking in organizations as a template for discussing design guidelines for Sensible AI, AI that factors in the nuances of human cognition when trying to explain itself., Comment: To appear at FAccT 2022

Can crowd workers be trusted to judge whether news-like articles circulating on the Internet are misleading, or does partisanship and inexperience get in the way? And can the task be structured in a way that reduces partisanship? We assembled pools of both liberal and conservative crowd raters and tested three ways of asking them to make judgments about 374 articles. In a no research condition, they were just asked to view the article and then render a judgment. In an individual research condition, they were also asked to search for corroborating evidence and provide a link to the best evidence they found. In a collective research condition, they were not asked to search, but instead to review links collected from workers in the individual research condition. Both research conditions reduced partisan disagreement in judgments. The individual research condition was most effective at producing alignment with journalists' assessments. In this condition, the judgments of a panel of sixteen or more crowd workers were better than that of a panel of three expert journalists, as measured by alignment with a held out journalist's ratings., Comment: Revised title and framing to focus on difference results for different experimental conditions; new Fig. 1 that provides overview of the performance comparison process; other improvements in response to reviewer feedback

Should social media platforms override a community's self-policing when it repeatedly break rules? What actions can they consider? In light of this debate, platforms have begun experimenting with softer alternatives to outright bans. We examine one such intervention called quarantining, that impedes direct access to and promotion of controversial communities. Specifically, we present two case studies of what happened when Reddit quarantined the influential communities r/TheRedPill (TRP) and r/The_Donald (TD). Using over 85M Reddit posts, we apply causal inference methods to examine the quarantine's effects on TRP and TD. We find that the quarantine made it more difficult to recruit new members: new user influx to TRP and TD decreased by 79.5% and 58%, respectively. Despite quarantining, existing users' misogyny and racism levels remained unaffected. We conclude by reflecting on the effectiveness of this design friction in limiting the influence of toxic communities and discuss broader implications for content moderation.

In this dataset paper, we present a three-stage process to collect Reddit comments that are removed comments by moderators of several subreddits, for violating subreddit rules and guidelines. Other than the fact that these comments were flagged by moderators for violating community norms, we do not have any other information regarding the nature of the violations. Through this procedure, we collect over 2M comments removed by moderators of 100 different Reddit communities, and publicly release the data. Working with this dataset of removed comments, we identify 8 macro norms---norms that are widely enforced on most parts of Reddit. We extract these macro norms by employing a hybrid approach---classification, topic modeling, and open-coding---on comments identified to be norm violations within at least 85 out of the 100 study subreddits. Finally, we label over 40K Reddit comments removed by moderators according to the specific type of macro norm being violated, and make this dataset publicly available. By breaking down a collection of removed comments into more granular types of macro norm violation, our dataset can be used to train more nuanced machine learning classifiers for online moderation.

There is evidence that Russia's Internet Research Agency attempted to interfere with the 2016 U.S. election by running fake accounts on Twitter - often referred to as "Russian trolls". In this work, we: 1) develop machine learning models that predict whether a Twitter account is a Russian troll within a set of 170K control accounts; and, 2) demonstrate that it is possible to use this model to find active accounts on Twitter still likely acting on behalf of the Russian state. Using both behavioral and linguistic features, we show that it is possible to distinguish between a troll and a non-troll with a precision of 78.5% and an AUC of 98.9%, under cross-validation. Applying the model to out-of-sample accounts still active today, we find that up to 2.6% of top journalists' mentions are occupied by Russian trolls. These findings imply that the Russian trolls are very likely still active today. Additional analysis shows that they are not merely software-controlled bots, and manage their online identities in various complex ways. Finally, we argue that if it is possible to discover these accounts using externally - accessible data, then the platforms - with access to a variety of private internal signals - should succeed at similar or better rates.

Today, social media provide the means by which billions of people experience news and events happening around the world. However, the absence of traditional journalistic gatekeeping allows information to flow unencumbered through these platforms, often raising questions of veracity and credibility of the reported information. Here we ask: How do the dynamics of collective attention directed toward an event reported on social media vary with its perceived credibility? By examining the first large-scale, systematically tracked credibility database of public Twitter messages (47M messages corresponding to 1,138 real-world events over a span of three months), we established a relationship between the temporal dynamics of events reported on social media and their associated level of credibility judgments. Representing collective attention by the aggregate temporal signatures of an event reportage, we found that the amount of continued attention focused on an event provides information about its associated levels of perceived credibility. Events exhibiting sustained, intermittent bursts of attention were found to be associated with lower levels of perceived credibility. In other words, as more people showed interest during moments of transient collective attention, the associated uncertainty surrounding these events also increased.

We have analyzed new HST/ACS and HST/WFC3 imaging in F475W and F814W of two previously-unobserved fields along the M31 minor axis to confirm our previous constraints on the shape of M31's inner stellar halo. Both of these new datasets reach a depth of at least F814W$<$27 and clearly detect the blue horizontal branch (BHB) of the field as a distinct feature of the color-magnitude diagram. We measure the density of BHB stars and the ratio of BHB to red giant branch stars in each field using identical techniques to our previous work. We find excellent agreement with our previous measurement of a power-law for the 2-D projected surface density with an index of 2.6$^{+0.3}_{-0.2}$ outside of 3 kpc, which flattens to $\alpha <$1.2 inside of 3 kpc. Our findings confirm our previous suggestion that the field BHB stars in M31 are part of the halo population. However, the total halo profile is now known to differ from this BHB profile, which suggests that we have isolated the metal-poor component. This component appears to have an unbroken power-law profile from 3-150 kpc but accounts for only about half of the total halo stellar mass. Discrepancies between the BHB density profile and other measurements of the inner halo are therefore likely due to the different profile of the metal-rich halo component, which is not only steeper than the profile of the met al-poor component, but also has a larger core radius. These profile differences also help to explain the large ratio of BHB/RGB stars in our observations., Comment: 11 pages, 6 figures, accepted for publication in ApJ