The spread of fake news on social media poses a serious threat to public trust and societal stability. While propagation-based methods improve fake news detection by modeling how information spreads, they often suffer from incomplete propagation data. Recent work leverages large language models (LLMs) to generate synthetic propagation, but typically overlooks the structural patterns of real-world discussions. In this paper, we propose a novel structure-aware synthetic propagation enhanced detection (StruSP) framework to fully capture structural dynamics from real propagation. It enables LLMs to generate realistic and structurally consistent propagation for better detection. StruSP explicitly aligns synthetic propagation with real-world propagation in both semantic and structural dimensions. Besides, we also design a new bidirectional evolutionary propagation (BEP) learning strategy to better align LLMs with structural patterns of propagation in the real world via structure-aware hybrid sampling and masked propagation modeling objective. Experiments on three public datasets demonstrate that StruSP significantly improves fake news detection performance in various practical detection scenarios. Further analysis indicates that BEP enables the LLM to generate more realistic and diverse propagation semantically and structurally.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 1,056 篇学术成果中精准定位
Language-Informed Synthesis of Rational Agent Models for Grounded Theory-of-Mind Reasoning On-the-fly
PDF ↗Drawing real world social inferences usually requires taking into account information from multiple modalities. Language is a particularly powerful source of information in social settings, especially in novel situations where language can provide both abstract information about the environment dynamics and concrete specifics about an agent that cannot be easily visually observed. In this paper, we propose Language-Informed Rational Agent Synthesis (LIRAS), a framework for drawing context-specific social inferences that integrate linguistic and visual inputs. LIRAS frames multimodal social reasoning as a process of constructing structured but situation-specific agent and environment representations – leveraging multimodal language models to parse language and visual inputs into unified symbolic representations, over which a Bayesian inverse planning engine can be run to produce granular probabilistic judgments. On a range of existing and new social reasoning tasks derived from cognitive science experiments, we find that our model (instantiated with a comparatively lightweight VLM) outperforms ablations and state-of-the-art models in capturing human judgments across all domains.
SGCD: Subtask-Guided Causal-Debiasing Framework for Robust Cross-Utterance Sentiment Quadruple Extraction in Dialogues
PDF ↗The rise of digital social media has generated a vast amount of conversational data on platforms like Twitter and Reddit, allowing users to express sentiments through multi-turn dialogues. Dialogue-level aspect-based sentiment quadruple analysis (DiaASQ) seeks to extract structured information in the form of quadruples from these dialogues. However, it encounters challenges related to cross-utterance elements and focus bias. To address these issues, we introduce the Subtask-Guided and Causal-Debiasing (SGCD) framework. This framework leverages subtask-specific features to guide the learning of token-level features, which are then adaptively combined at the utterance level to meet specific semantic requirements. The SGCD framework employs multi-granularity attention paths to enhance cross-utterance matching and dialogue structure modeling. It also incorporates structural causal graphs and inverse probability weighting to mitigate biases from speakers and thread structures. Experimental results demonstrate that SGCD outperforms state-of-the-art methods, improving semantic modeling and bias robustness. This approach provides an effective solution for structured sentiment analysis in complex dialogues.
We introduce AraSafe, the first large-scale native Arabic safety benchmark for large language models (LLMs), addressing the pressing need for culturally and linguistically representative evaluation resources. The dataset comprises 12K naturally occurring, human-written Arabic prompts containing both harmful and non-harmful content across diverse domains, including linguistics, social studies, and science. Each prompt was independently annotated by two experts into one of nine fine-grained safety categories, including ‘Safe/Not Harmful’, ‘Illegal Activities’, ‘Violence or Harm’, ‘Privacy Violation’, and ‘Hate Speech’. Additionally, to support training classifiers for harmful content and due to the imbalanced representation of harmful content in the natural dataset, we create a synthetic dataset of additional 12K harmful prompts generated by GPT-4o via carefully designed prompt engineering techniques. We benchmark a number of Arabic-centric and multilingual models in the 7 to 13B parameter range, including Jais, AceGPT, Allam, Fanar, Llama-3, Gemma-2, and Qwen3, as well as BERT-based fine-tuned classifier models on detecting harmful prompts. GPT-4o was used as an upper-bound reference baseline. Our evaluation reveals critical safety blind spots in Arabic LLMs and underscores the necessity of localized, culturally grounded benchmarks for building responsible AI systems.
A Monte-Carlo Sampling Framework For Reliable Evaluation of Large Language Models Using Behavioral Analysis
PDF ↗Scientific evaluation of Large Language Models is an important topic that quantifies any degree of progress we make with new models. Even though current LLMs show high level of accuracy on benchmark datasets, the single-sample approach to evaluating them is not sufficient as it ignores high entropy of LLM responses. We introduce a Monte-Carlo evaluation framework for evaluating LLMs that follows behavioral science methodologies and provides statistical guarantees for estimates of performance. We test our framework on multiple LLMs to see if they are susceptible to cognitive biases. We find significant effect of prompts that induce cognitive biases in LLMs, raising questions about their reliability in social sciences and business. We also see higher susceptibility of newer and larger LLMs to cognitive biases, which shows a development towards more human-like and less rational LLM responses. We conclude by calling for the use of Monte-Carlo sampling as opposed to pass@1 for the broader LLM evaluations.
The rapid advancement of large language models has revolutionized various applications but also raised crucial concerns about their potential to perpetuate biases and unfairness when deployed in social media contexts. Evaluating LLMs’ potential biases and fairness has become crucial, as existing methods rely on limited prompts focusing on just a few groups, lacking a comprehensive categorical perspective. In this paper, we propose evaluating LLM biases from a group fairness lens using a novel hierarchical schema characterizing diverse social groups. Specifically, we construct a dataset, GFair, encapsulating target-attribute combinations across multiple dimensions. In addition, we introduce statement organization, a new open-ended text generation task, to uncover complex biases in LLMs. Extensive evaluations of popular LLMs reveal inherent safety concerns. To mitigate the biases of LLM from a group fairness perspective, we pioneer a novel chain-of-thought method GF-Think to mitigate biases of LLMs from a group fairness perspective. Experimental results demonstrate its efficacy in mitigating bias in LLMs to achieve fairness.
In the “human-bot symbiotic” information ecosystem, social bots play key roles in spreading and correcting disinformation. Understanding their influence is essential for risk control and better governance. However, current studies often rely on simplistic user and network modeling, overlook the dynamic behavior of bots, and lack quantitative evaluation of correction strategies. To fill these gaps, we propose MADD, a Multi-Agent-based framework for Disinformation Dissemination. MADD constructs a more realistic propagation network by integrating the Barabási–Albert Model for scale-free topology and the Stochastic Block Model for community structures, while designing node attributes based on real-world user data. Furthermore, MADD incorporates both malicious and legitimate bots, with their controlled dynamic participation allows for quantitative analysis of correction strategies. We evaluate MADD using individual and group-level metrics. We experimentally verify the real-world consistency of MADD’s user attributes and network structure, and we simulate the dissemination of six disinformation topics, demonstrating the differential effects of fact-based and narrative-based correction strategies. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/QQQQQQBY/BotInfluence.
DLIR: Spherical Adaptation for Cross-Lingual Knowledge Transfer of Sociological Concepts Alignment
PDF ↗Cross-lingual alignment of nuanced sociological concepts is crucial for comparative cross-cultural research, harmonising longitudinal studies, and leveraging knowledge from social science taxonomies (e.g., ELSST). However, aligning these concepts is challenging due to cultural context-dependency, linguistic variation, and data scarcity, particularly for low-resource languages. Existing methods often fail to capture domain-specific subtleties or require extensive parallel data. Grounded in a Vector Decomposition Hypothesis—positing separable domain and language components within embeddings, supported by observed language-pair specific geometric structures—we propose DLIR (Dual-Branch LoRA for Invariant Representation). DLIR employs parallel Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) branches: one captures core sociological semantics (trained primarily on English data structured by the ELSST hierarchy), while the other learns language invariance by counteracting specific language perturbations. These perturbations are modeled by Gaussian Mixture Models (GMMs) fitted on minimal parallel concept data using spherical geometry. DLIR significantly outperforms strong baselines on cross-lingual sociological concept retrieval across 10 languages. Demonstrating powerful zero-shot knowledge transfer, English-trained DLIR substantially surpasses target-language (French/German) LoRA fine-tuning even in monolingual tasks. DLIR learns disentangled, language-robust representations, advancing resource-efficient multilingual understanding and enabling reliable cross-lingual comparison of sociological constructs.
Mitigating Geospatial Knowledge Hallucination in Large Language Models: Benchmarking and Dynamic Factuality Aligning
PDF ↗Large language models (LLMs) possess extensive world knowledge, including geospatial knowledge, which has been successfully applied to various geospatial tasks such as mobility prediction and social indicator prediction. However, LLMs often generate inaccurate geospatial knowledge, leading to geospatial hallucinations—incorrect or inconsistent representations of geospatial information—that compromise their reliability. While the phenomenon of general knowledge hallucination in LLMs has been widely studied, the systematic evaluation and mitigation of geospatial hallucinations remain largely unexplored. To address this gap, we propose a comprehensive evaluation framework for geospatial hallucinations, leveraging structured geospatial knowledge graphs for controlled assessment. Through extensive evaluation across 20 advanced LLMs, we uncover the hallucinations in their geospatial knowledge. Building on these insights, we introduce a dynamic factuality aligning method based on Kahneman-Tversky Optimization (KTO) to mitigate geospatial hallucinations in LLMs, leading to a performance improvement of over 29.6% on the proposed benchmark. Extensive experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our benchmark and learning algorithm in enhancing the trustworthiness of LLMs in geospatial knowledge and reasoning tasks.
AI Argues Differently: Distinct Argumentative and Linguistic Patterns of LLMs in Persuasive Contexts
PDF ↗Distinguishing LLM-generated text from human-written is a key challenge for safe and ethical NLP, particularly in high-stake settings such as persuasive online discourse. While recent work focuses on detection, real-world use cases also demand interpretable tools to help humans understand and distinguish LLM-generated texts. To this end, we present an analysis framework comparing human- and LLM-authored arguments using two easily-interpretable feature sets: general-purpose linguistic features (e.g., lexical richness, syntactic complexity) and domain-specific features related to argument quality (e.g., logical soundness, engagement strategies). Applied to */r/ChangeMyView* arguments by humans and three LLMs, our method reveals clear patterns: LLM-generated counter-arguments show lower type-token and lemma-token ratios but higher emotional intensity — particularly in anticipation and trust. They more closely resemble textbook-quality arguments — cogent, justified, explicitly respectful toward others, and positive in tone. Moreover, counter-arguments generated by LLMs converge more closely with the original post’s style and quality than those written by humans. Finally, we demonstrate that these differences enable a lightweight, interpretable, and highly effective classifier for detecting LLM-generated comments in CMV.
Human moderators in online discussions face a heterogeneous range of tasks, which go beyond content moderation, or policing. They also support and improve discussion quality, which is challenging to model (and evaluate) in NLP due to its inherent subjectivity and the scarcity of annotated resources. We address this gap by introducing PerspectiveMod, a dataset of online comments annotated for the question: *“Does this comment require moderation, and why?”* Annotations were collected from both expert moderators and trained non-experts. **PerspectiveMod** is unique in its intentional variation across (a) the level of moderation experience embedded in the source data (professional vs. non-professional moderation environments), (b) the annotator profiles (experts vs. trained crowdworkers), and (c) the richness of each moderation judgment, both in terms on fine-grained comment properties (drawn from argumentation and deliberative theory) and in the representation of the individuality of the annotator (socio-demographics and attitudes towards the task). We advance understanding of the task’s complexity by providing interpretation layers that account for its subjectivity. Our statistical analysis highlights the value of collecting annotator perspectives, including their experiences, attitudes, and views on AI, as a foundation for developing more context-aware and interpretively robust moderation tools.
Many constructs that characterize language, like its complexity or emotionality, have a naturally continuous semantic structure; a public speech is not just “simple” or “complex”, but exists on a continuum between extremes. Although large language models (LLMs) are an attractive tool for measuring scalar constructs, their idiosyncratic treatment of numerical outputs raises questions of how to best apply them. We address these questions with a comprehensive evaluation of LLM-based approaches to scalar construct measurement in social science. Using multiple datasets sourced from the political science literature, we evaluate four approaches: unweighted direct pointwise scoring, aggregation of pairwise comparisons, token-probability-weighted pointwise scoring, and finetuning. Our study finds that pairwise comparisons made by LLMs produce better measurements than simply prompting the LLM to directly output the scores, which suffers from bunching around arbitrary numbers. However, taking the weighted mean over the token probability of scores further improves the measurements over the two previous approaches. Finally, finetuning smaller models with as few as 1,000 training pairs can match or exceed the performance of prompted LLMs.
Automated frame analysis of political communication is a popular task in computational social science that is used to study how authors select aspects of a topic to frame its reception. So far, such studies have been narrow, in that they use a fixed set of pre-defined frames and focus only on the text, ignoring the visual contexts in which those texts appear. Especially for framing in the news, this leaves out valuable information about editorial choices, which include not just the written article but also accompanying photographs. To overcome such limitations, we present a method for conducting multi-modal, multi-label framing analysis at scale using large (vision-) language models. Grounding our work in framing theory, we extract latent meaning embedded in images used to convey a certain point and contrast that to the text by comparing the respective frames used. We also identify highly partisan framing of topics with issue-specific frame analysis found in prior qualitative work. We demonstrate a method for doing scalable integrative framing analysis of both text and image in news, providing a more complete picture for understanding media bias.
The proliferation of multimodal content on social media presents significant challenges in understanding and moderating complex, context-dependent issues such as misinformation, hate speech, and propaganda. While efforts have been made to develop resources and propose new methods for automatic detection, limited attention has been given to label detection and the generation of explanation-based rationales for predicted labels. To address this challenge, we introduce MemeXplain, an explanation-enhanced dataset for propaganda memes in Arabic and hateful memes in English, making it the first large-scale resource for these tasks. To solve these tasks, we propose a novel multi-stage optimization approach and train Vision-Language Models (VLMs). Our results demonstrate that this approach significantly improves performance over the base model for both label detection and explanation generation, outperforming the current state-of-the-art with an absolute improvement of approximately 3% on ArMeme and 7% on Hateful Memes. For reproducibility and future research, we aim to make the MemeXplain dataset and scripts publicly available.
Large language models (LLMs) offer a powerful opportunity to simulate the results of social science experiments. In this work, we demonstrate that finetuning LLMs directly on individual-level responses from past experiments meaningfully improves the accuracy of such simulations. We construct SocSci210 via an automatic pipeline, a dataset comprising 2.9 million responses from 400,491 participants in 210 open-source social science experiments. Through finetuning, we achieve multiple levels of generalization. In completely unseen studies, our strongest model, Socrates-Qwen-14B, produces predictions that are 36% more aligned with distributions of human responses to diverse outcome questions under varying conditions relative to its base model (Qwen2.5-14B), outperforming GPT-4o by 15%. By finetuning on a subset of conditions in a study, generalization to new unseen conditions is particularly robust, improving by 71%. Since SocSci210 contains rich demographic information, we reduce demographic parity difference, a measure of bias, by 10.6% through finetuning. Because social sciences routinely generate rich, topic-specific datasets, our findings indicate that finetuning on such data could enable more accurate simulations for experimental hypothesis screening. We release our data, models and finetuning code.
Assessing effective de-escalation of crisis conversations using transformer-based models and trend statistics
PDF ↗One of the core goals of crisis counseling services is to support emotional de-escalation of the individual in crisis, by reducing intense negative emotional affect and emotional dysregulation. The science of crisis intervention has been impeded, however, by a lack of quantitative approaches that allow for detailed analysis of emotion in crisis conversations. In order to measure de-escalation at scale (millions of text-based conversations), lightweight models are needed that can assign not just binary sentiment predictions but quantitative scores to capture graded change in emotional valence. Accordingly, we developed a transformer-based emotional valence scoring model fit for crisis conversations, BERT-EV, that assigns numerical emotional valence scores to rate the intensity of expressed negative versus positive emotion. This transformer-based model can run on modest hardware configurations, allowing it to scale affordably and efficiently to a massive corpus of crisis conversations. We evaluated model performance on a corpus of hand-scored social media messages, and found that BERT-EV outperforms existing dictionary-based standard tools in the field, as well as other transformer-based implementations and an LLM in accurately matching scores from human annotators. Finally, we show that trends in these emotional valence scores can be used to assess emotional de-escalation during crisis conversations, with sufficient turn-by-turn granularity to help identify helpful vs. detrimental crisis counselor statements.
Effective human communication in social settings is contingent on recognizing subtle cues, such as intents or implications. Without such cues, NLP models risk missing social signals, instead relying on surface patterns. We introduce SOCIAL SCAFFOLDS, an automated framework for facilitating generalization across social reasoning tasks by generating rationales that make these social cues explicit. Grounded in narrative modeling principles, we generate task-agnostic rationales that capture different perspectives, i.e., that of the speaker, the listener, and the general world-view. Our experimental suite showcases that providing rationales as augmentations aids task performance for both supervised fine-tuning and in-context learning paradigms. Notably, providing all three rationale types significantly improves cross-task performance in 44% of cases, and inferred speaker intent in 31.3% of cases. We conduct statistical and ablation analyses that show how rationales complement the input text and are used effectively by models.
Role-playing capabilities in large language models (LLMs) often lack cognitive consistency in complex scenarios that require deep understanding and coherent reasoning. While recent reasoning models excel in math and coding tasks, they show limited effectiveness in open-ended role-playing scenarios. We introduce R-CHAR (Role-Consistent Hierarchical Adaptive Reasoning), a metacognition-driven framework that enhances role-playing performance through guided thinking trajectories synthesis and adaptive evaluation. Our approach demonstrates that concise thinking processes can achieve superior performance efficiently compared to elaborate reasoning chains in role-playing social intelligence tasks, outperforming existing specialized models. Experimental results on the SocialBench benchmark show significant and stable performance improvements across varying scenario complexities, showing particular strength in long-context comprehension (from 34.64% to 68.59%) and group-level social interactions. Our work advances the development of cognitively consistent role-playing systems, bridging the gap between surface-level mimicry and authentic character simulation.
Real-world data combines structured (e.g., graph connections) and unstructured (e.g., text, visuals) formats, capturing explicit relationships (e.g., social links) and implicit semantic interdependencies (e.g., knowledge graphs). We propose GraphAgent, an automated agent pipeline addressing both explicit and implicit graph-enhanced semantic dependencies for predictive (e.g., node classification) and generative (e.g., text generation) tasks. GraphAgent integrates three components: (i) a Graph Generator Agent creating knowledge graphs for semantic dependencies; (ii) a Task Planning Agent interpreting user queries and formulating tasks via self-planning; and (iii) a Task Execution Agent automating task execution with tool matching. These agents combine language and graph language models to reveal complex relational and semantic patterns. Extensive experiments on diverse datasets validate GraphAgent’s effectiveness in graph-related predictive and text generative tasks. GraphAgent is open-sourced at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/GraphAgent-Submit-6F52/.
We present a survey of methods for assessing and enhancing the quality of online discussions, focusing on the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs). While online discourses aim, at least in theory, to foster mutual understanding, they often devolve into harmful exchanges, such as hate speech, threatening social cohesion and democratic values. Recent advancements in LLMs enable artificial facilitation agents to not only moderate content, but also actively improve the quality of interactions. Our survey synthesizes ideas from Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Social Sciences to provide (a) a new taxonomy on discussion quality evaluation, (b) an overview of intervention and facilitation strategies, (c) along with a new taxonomy of conversation facilitation datasets, (d) an LLM-oriented roadmap of good practices and future research directions, from technological and societal perspectives.