Add to Chrome
Add to Firefox
Add to EdgeAshiqur R. KhudaBukhsh
Community Needs and Assets: A Computational Analysis of Community Conversations
Mar 20, 2024
A community needs assessment is a tool used by non-profits and government agencies to quantify the strengths and issues of a community, allowing them to allocate their resources better. Such approaches are transitioning towards leveraging social media conversations to analyze the needs of communities and the assets already present within them. However, manual analysis of exponentially increasing social media conversations is challenging. There is a gap in the present literature in computationally analyzing how community members discuss the strengths and needs of the community. To address this gap, we introduce the task of identifying, extracting, and categorizing community needs and assets from conversational data using sophisticated natural language processing methods. To facilitate this task, we introduce the first dataset about community needs and assets consisting of 3,511 conversations from Reddit, annotated using crowdsourced workers. Using this dataset, we evaluate an utterance-level classification model compared to sentiment classification and a popular large language model (in a zero-shot setting), where we find that our model outperforms both baselines at an F1 score of 94% compared to 49% and 61% respectively. Furthermore, we observe through our study that conversations about needs have negative sentiments and emotions, while conversations about assets focus on location and entities. The dataset is available at https://github.com/towhidabsar/CommunityNeeds.
Infrastructure Ombudsman: Mining Future Failure Concerns from Structural Disaster Response
Feb 22, 2024Current research concentrates on studying discussions on social media related to structural failures to improve disaster response strategies. However, detecting social web posts discussing concerns about anticipatory failures is under-explored. If such concerns are channeled to the appropriate authorities, it can aid in the prevention and mitigation of potential infrastructural failures. In this paper, we develop an infrastructure ombudsman -- that automatically detects specific infrastructure concerns. Our work considers several recent structural failures in the US. We present a first-of-its-kind dataset of 2,662 social web instances for this novel task mined from Reddit and YouTube.
Down the Toxicity Rabbit Hole: Investigating PaLM 2 Guardrails
Sep 18, 2023
This paper conducts a robustness audit of the safety feedback of PaLM 2 through a novel toxicity rabbit hole framework introduced here. Starting with a stereotype, the framework instructs PaLM 2 to generate more toxic content than the stereotype. Every subsequent iteration it continues instructing PaLM 2 to generate more toxic content than the previous iteration until PaLM 2 safety guardrails throw a safety violation. Our experiments uncover highly disturbing antisemitic, Islamophobic, racist, homophobic, and misogynistic (to list a few) generated content that PaLM 2 safety guardrails do not evaluate as highly unsafe.
Disentangling Societal Inequality from Model Biases: Gender Inequality in Divorce Court Proceedings
Jul 09, 2023
Divorce is the legal dissolution of a marriage by a court. Since this is usually an unpleasant outcome of a marital union, each party may have reasons to call the decision to quit which is generally documented in detail in the court proceedings. Via a substantial corpus of 17,306 court proceedings, this paper investigates gender inequality through the lens of divorce court proceedings. While emerging data sources (e.g., public court records) on sensitive societal issues hold promise in aiding social science research, biases present in cutting-edge natural language processing (NLP) methods may interfere with or affect such studies. We thus require a thorough analysis of potential gaps and limitations present in extant NLP resources. In this paper, on the methodological side, we demonstrate that existing NLP resources required several non-trivial modifications to quantify societal inequalities. On the substantive side, we find that while a large number of court cases perhaps suggest changing norms in India where women are increasingly challenging patriarchy, AI-powered analyses of these court proceedings indicate striking gender inequality with women often subjected to domestic violence.
For Women, Life, Freedom: A Participatory AI-Based Social Web Analysis of a Watershed Moment in Iran's Gender Struggles
Jul 07, 2023
In this paper, we present a computational analysis of the Persian language Twitter discourse with the aim to estimate the shift in stance toward gender equality following the death of Mahsa Amini in police custody. We present an ensemble active learning pipeline to train a stance classifier. Our novelty lies in the involvement of Iranian women in an active role as annotators in building this AI system. Our annotators not only provide labels, but they also suggest valuable keywords for more meaningful corpus creation as well as provide short example documents for a guided sampling step. Our analyses indicate that Mahsa Amini's death triggered polarized Persian language discourse where both fractions of negative and positive tweets toward gender equality increased. The increase in positive tweets was slightly greater than the increase in negative tweets. We also observe that with respect to account creation time, between the state-aligned Twitter accounts and pro-protest Twitter accounts, pro-protest accounts are more similar to baseline Persian Twitter activity.
Subjective Crowd Disagreements for Subjective Data: Uncovering Meaningful CrowdOpinion with Population-level Learning
Jul 07, 2023
Human-annotated data plays a critical role in the fairness of AI systems, including those that deal with life-altering decisions or moderating human-created web/social media content. Conventionally, annotator disagreements are resolved before any learning takes place. However, researchers are increasingly identifying annotator disagreement as pervasive and meaningful. They also question the performance of a system when annotators disagree. Particularly when minority views are disregarded, especially among groups that may already be underrepresented in the annotator population. In this paper, we introduce \emph{CrowdOpinion}\footnote{Accepted for publication at ACL 2023}, an unsupervised learning based approach that uses language features and label distributions to pool similar items into larger samples of label distributions. We experiment with four generative and one density-based clustering method, applied to five linear combinations of label distributions and features. We use five publicly available benchmark datasets (with varying levels of annotator disagreements) from social media (Twitter, Gab, and Reddit). We also experiment in the wild using a dataset from Facebook, where annotations come from the platform itself by users reacting to posts. We evaluate \emph{CrowdOpinion} as a label distribution prediction task using KL-divergence and a single-label problem using accuracy measures.
Vicarious Offense and Noise Audit of Offensive Speech Classifiers
Feb 03, 2023
This paper examines social web content moderation from two key perspectives: automated methods (machine moderators) and human evaluators (human moderators). We conduct a noise audit at an unprecedented scale using nine machine moderators trained on well-known offensive speech data sets evaluated on a corpus sampled from 92 million YouTube comments discussing a multitude of issues relevant to US politics. We introduce a first-of-its-kind data set of vicarious offense. We ask annotators: (1) if they find a given social media post offensive; and (2) how offensive annotators sharing different political beliefs would find the same content. Our experiments with machine moderators reveal that moderation outcomes wildly vary across different machine moderators. Our experiments with human moderators suggest that (1) political leanings considerably affect first-person offense perspective; (2) Republicans are the worst predictors of vicarious offense; (3) predicting vicarious offense for the Republicans is most challenging than predicting vicarious offense for the Independents and the Democrats; and (4) disagreement across political identity groups considerably increases when sensitive issues such as reproductive rights or gun control/rights are discussed. Both experiments suggest that offense, is indeed, highly subjective and raise important questions concerning content moderation practices.
'Beach' to 'Bitch': Inadvertent Unsafe Transcription of Kids' Content on YouTube
Feb 17, 2022
Over the last few years, YouTube Kids has emerged as one of the highly competitive alternatives to television for children's entertainment. Consequently, YouTube Kids' content should receive an additional level of scrutiny to ensure children's safety. While research on detecting offensive or inappropriate content for kids is gaining momentum, little or no current work exists that investigates to what extent AI applications can (accidentally) introduce content that is inappropriate for kids. In this paper, we present a novel (and troubling) finding that well-known automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems may produce text content highly inappropriate for kids while transcribing YouTube Kids' videos. We dub this phenomenon as \emph{inappropriate content hallucination}. Our analyses suggest that such hallucinations are far from occasional, and the ASR systems often produce them with high confidence. We release a first-of-its-kind data set of audios for which the existing state-of-the-art ASR systems hallucinate inappropriate content for kids. In addition, we demonstrate that some of these errors can be fixed using language models.
Fringe News Networks: Dynamics of US News Viewership following the 2020 Presidential Election
Jan 22, 2021
The growing political polarization of the American electorate over the last several decades has been widely studied and documented. During the administration of President Donald Trump, charges of "fake news" made social and news media not only the means but, to an unprecedented extent, the topic of political communication. Using data from before the November 3rd, 2020 US Presidential election, recent work has demonstrated the viability of using YouTube's social media ecosystem to obtain insights into the extent of US political polarization as well as the relationship between this polarization and the nature of the content and commentary provided by different US news networks. With that work as background, this paper looks at the sharp transformation of the relationship between news consumers and here-to-fore "fringe" news media channels in the 64 days between the US presidential election and the violence that took place at US Capitol on January 6th. This paper makes two distinct types of contributions. The first is to introduce a novel methodology to analyze large social media data to study the dynamics of social political news networks and their viewers. The second is to provide insights into what actually happened regarding US political social media channels and their viewerships during this volatile 64 day period.
Are Chess Discussions Racist? An Adversarial Hate Speech Data Set
Nov 20, 2020
On June 28, 2020, while presenting a chess podcast on Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura, Antonio Radi\'c's YouTube handle got blocked because it contained "harmful and dangerous" content. YouTube did not give further specific reason, and the channel got reinstated within 24 hours. However, Radi\'c speculated that given the current political situation, a referral to "black against white", albeit in the context of chess, earned him this temporary ban. In this paper, via a substantial corpus of 681,995 comments, on 8,818 YouTube videos hosted by five highly popular chess-focused YouTube channels, we ask the following research question: \emph{how robust are off-the-shelf hate-speech classifiers to out-of-domain adversarial examples?} We release a data set of 1,000 annotated comments where existing hate speech classifiers misclassified benign chess discussions as hate speech. We conclude with an intriguing analogy result on racial bias with our findings pointing out to the broader challenge of color polysemy.