Recent advances in the field of generative artificial intelligence (AI) have blurred the lines between authentic and machine-generated content, making it almost impossible for humans to distinguish between such media. One notable consequence is the use of AI-generated images for fake profiles on social media. While several types of disinformation campaigns and similar incidents have been reported in the past, a systematic analysis has been lacking. In this work, we conduct the first large-scale investigation of the prevalence of AI-generated profile pictures on Twitter. We tackle the challenges of a real-world measurement study by carefully integrating various data sources and designing a multi-stage detection pipeline. Our analysis of nearly 15 million Twitter profile pictures shows that 0.052% were artificially generated, confirming their notable presence on the platform. We comprehensively examine the characteristics of these accounts and their tweet content, and uncover patterns of coordinated inauthentic behavior. The results also reveal several motives, including spamming and political amplification campaigns. Our research reaffirms the need for effective detection and mitigation strategies to cope with the potential negative effects of generative AI in the future.
NLP models are used in a variety of critical social computing tasks, such as detecting sexist, racist, or otherwise hateful content. Therefore, it is imperative that these models are robust to spurious features. Past work has attempted to tackle such spurious features using training data augmentation, including Counterfactually Augmented Data (CADs). CADs introduce minimal changes to existing training data points and flip their labels; training on them may reduce model dependency on spurious features. However, manually generating CADs can be time-consuming and expensive. Hence in this work, we assess if this task can be automated using generative NLP models. We automatically generate CADs using Polyjuice, ChatGPT, and Flan-T5, and evaluate their usefulness in improving model robustness compared to manually-generated CADs. By testing both model performance on multiple out-of-domain test sets and individual data point efficacy, our results show that while manual CADs are still the most effective, CADs generated by ChatGPT come a close second. One key reason for the lower performance of automated methods is that the changes they introduce are often insufficient to flip the original label.
Social bots have recently gained attention in the context of public opinion manipulation on social media platforms. While a lot of research effort has been put into the classification and detection of such (semi-)automated programs, it is still unclear how sophisticated those bots actually are, which platforms they target, and where they originate from. To answer these questions, we gathered repository data from open source collaboration platforms to identify the status-quo as well as trends of publicly available bot code. Our findings indicate that most of the code on collaboration platforms is of supportive nature and provides modules of automation instead of fully fledged social bot programs. Hence, the cost (in terms of additional programming effort) for building social bots with the goal of topic-specific manipulation is higher than assumed and that methods in context of machine- or deep-learning currently only play a minor role. However, our approach can be applied as multifaceted knowledge discovery framework to monitor trends in public bot code evolution to detect new developments and streams.