Social Media Analysis

Social media is a rich source of real-time public sentiment, but widely used sentiment analysis tools are often applied without understanding their limitations. In this study, we evaluate the inter-rater reliability of three bespoke sentiment analysis tools (TextBlob, VADER, and Twitter-roBERTa-base) and three large language models (LLMs: Qwen3-32B, GPT-OSS-120B, Llama-4-Maverick-17B) against six human raters across 100 tweets. We measured agreement using two statistical measures: Cohen's kappa for pairwise comparisons and Fleiss' kappa for multiple raters. Even among the human raters, our results showed only fair agreement, highlighting the subjectivity of sentiment analysis. Higher agreement was observed under the binary sentiment classification (negative vs. non-negative and positive vs. non-positive) than under the three-class classification across both humans and automated tools. The Twitter-roBERTa-base model showed the strongest alignment with human ratings, outperforming both bespoke sentiment tools and LLMs, particularly in distinguishing negative versus non-negative sentiment. LLMs showed substantial agreement among themselves and moderate to substantial alignment with humans, performing better in positive vs. non-positive classifications. Our findings underscore that domain-specific fine-tuning remains crucial for reliable social media sentiment analysis, and human-centered evaluation remains essential for establishing gold-standard labels.

Limited review teams must identify which emerging claims are likely to keep growing before their eventual reach is known. We center early misinformation triage on this continuation-forecasting problem: predicting subsequent recorded propagation-tree growth from the first 30 minutes of activity. On FibVID, we compare early node count with structural depth entropy, temporal arrival entropy, and their pair while keeping all propagation trees from each original claim in one partition. Across 352 test trees from 59 claim groups separate from training, the combined model raises $R^2$ for log-transformed future growth from 0.307 to 0.323 and reduces log-MAE by 2.4% (95% claim-bootstrap CI, -0.4% to 5.2%). The gain is especially pronounced among 97 high-activity trees: $R^2$ rises from 0.248 to 0.395, Spearman's $ρ$ from 0.394 to 0.529, and log-MAE falls by 11.7% (95% CI, -1.9% to 23.9%). Complementing the 30-minute growth forecast, we analyze the first 15 replies in 563 PHEME threads. In this cohort, the 15th reply arrives after a median of 28.8 minutes; 52.0% reach the fixed reply prefix within 30 minutes and 71.6% within one hour. Even without the LLM-generated factual-accuracy dimension, the remaining stance, communicative, and affective state composition retains cross-event ranking signal (ROC-AUC 0.538); including that dimension increases ROC-AUC to 0.562. In a separate Check-COVID evaluation of 229 claims, reciprocal-rank fusion retrieves a gold evidence document within the top five for 74.2% of claims and within the top 20 for 94.3%; sentence reranking reaches Recall@20 of 58.1%. We propose an integrated human-review system that brings these early forecasts, response patterns, and retrieved evidence together for misinformation triage relying on the potential virality of claims.

A large part of political discourse on social media is built and expressed at a level of claims: i.e. declarative, typically single-clause statements, which convey a particular interpretation of reality and can range from factual to evaluative. Moreover, rather than occurring randomly, claims coalesce, recur in patterns, and come to be associated with different world views. When paired with structural computational tools such as Social Network Analysis, claims can be a powerful unit of analysis to study political phenomena such as echo chambers or polarisation. In this paper, we present a pipeline that uses a large language model (LLM) to inductively extract and catalogue claims from large social media corpora, and apply it to two different Twitter datasets: one relating to the 2020 US presidential election and the other to the 2022 FIFA World Cup. We comprehensively evaluate the approach by measuring the pipeline's recall and precision against manually annotated samples, run ablation studies isolating the contribution of its various components, and perform a qualitative error analysis. We discuss the value of the approach in the context of Computational Social Science research, and illustrate its capabilities by presenting the claims catalogue obtained from each dataset.

Explainable suicide-risk assessment requires models not only to estimate risk severity, but also to identify supporting language and the risk and protective factors expressed in a post. We present our system for the IEEE BigData 2026 Cup on Explainable Suicide Risk Assessment on Social Media, which addresses three tasks: risk-level classification, evidence phrase extraction, and multi-label factor identification. Our approach adapts Qwen2.5-Instruct models using quantized low-rank adaptation (QLoRA) and an answer-masked causal language-model objective. We jointly train across all three tasks for risk classification, jointly train on Tasks1a and 1b for evidence extraction, and adapt Task2 separately for factor identification. We also tailor aggregation to each output: we average risk-level probabilities from the 32B and 72B models, combine evidence phrases through cross-fold consensus, and calibrate factor-specific decisions through rate matching based on out-of-fold operating points. On the official leaderboard, the final system achieved a composite score of 0.7738, with 0.8089 on Task1 and 0.6919 on Task2. Across the evaluated configurations, three-task training performed best for Task1a, joint training on Tasks1a and 1b performed best for Task1b, and task-specific training performed best for Task2. Probability averaging further improved Task~1a when component models had complementary errors. These findings highlight the value of tailoring both training objectives and aggregation strategies to the output structure of each task within a unified language-model framework.

This paper presents a comparative multi-modal analysis of Italian and Romanian brain rot memes, investigating the factors that contribute to its appeal and the linguistic and cultural distinctions between the two versions. To conduct this analysis, we introduce a multi-modal brain rot dataset named CRIB (Collection of Romanian and Italian Brain rot), a manually curated collection of 240 TikTok videos stratified by language (Italian, Romanian) and popularity, on which we examine textual, acoustic, and visual features. Our findings indicate that popularity is not significantly correlated with textual elements like sentiment, absurdity, or rhyme, or acoustic elements such as vocal features or sentiment of the sound. Instead, in Romanian language, video-level dynamics, specifically faster cutting speeds and a more rapid overall pace, are strong predictors of a video's success. The cross-linguistic analysis reveals significant differences. Italian brain rot is textually more negative, exhibits higher perplexity, and uses more rhyme, while its sound is characterized by higher melodic range and loudness. Romanian audio is spectrally brighter with more erratic pitch variations.

Narrative extraction allows us to identify online hate narratives, supporting the construction of rigorous detection systems. Existing computational approaches, however, are limited in precision as they rely on semantic representations, which tend to capture only surface-level meaning. To detect more precise and interpretable narratives, we present an extraction pipeline that represents narratives as entity-evaluation pairs. Narratives are extracted using a Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning process that extends Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis, identifying the aspect, classifying its judgement type as the basis for evaluation, and deriving the evaluation accordingly. Extracted narratives are then clustered using Leiden, following which clusters are resolved to an intended level of granularity through an LLM-guided refinement process. We illustrate this narrative pipeline with English Reddit comments from 2024 that criticize Taylor Swift, analyzing a representative cluster that exhibits hate speech patterns to demonstrate its interpretive value.

Generative content is increasingly entering the production and dissemination of news, transforming fake news from manually fabricated or simply manipulated material into complex forms in which native and generated content jointly participate. Existing multimodal fake news detection research primarily focuses on veracity assessment and rarely characterizes how generativity differences affect the reliability of evidence. In contrast, AIGC detection primarily determines whether content is generated or modified by generative models, but it does not by itself establish whether the underlying news event is true. To bridge the separation between these tasks in data and evaluation, we construct Weibo26, a multimodal fake news detection dataset for generative-content scenarios. On this basis, we propose the Generativity-Aware Hierarchical Reasoning (GAHR) framework, which combines global judgment with local correction so that generativity information participates in news-veracity reasoning. Experiments on multiple existing fake news detection benchmarks and Weibo26 show that GAHR achieves competitive veracity-detection performance while effectively identifying generative content.

Conspiratorial discourse on social media is not always expressed through explicit claims or stable lexical markers. The same surface content may express endorsement, legitimate concerns, criticism, satire, or mockery. The main challenge is therefore not only recognizing conspiracy-related claims, but inferring the speaker's intent -- the utterance's illocutionary force. We argue that this can be achieved through the use of relevant social contexts and propose an agentic framework, equipped with a set of tools supporting social queries. We demonstrate the benefits of our approach on a unique dataset of Hebrew tweets, covering 80%--90% of the public Hebrew tweets published over a four-year span (late 2018-- early 2023), encompassing several election cycles as well as the COVID pandemic years and related vaccination campaigns. This extensive coverage can be used in recovering different social contexts. Evaluating our framework on a manually-annotated adversarial dataset, we find that context-aware workflows consistently outperform text-only classification and that the agentic framework performs significantly better than other frameworks and settings, including a non-agentic model exposed to the same contexts available to the agent. We further provide an analysis of the results, the errors and efficiency (token economy) tradeoffs. These findings support viewing the task of conspiracy detection as a socially embedded interpretation task, in which effective classification depends not only on access to contexts, but also on adaptive reasoning in which the agent uses tools on a per-case basis, asking only for evidence relevant to its current reasoning step.

Misinformation is widely reported to propagate faster on engagement-based platforms, yet prior work largely focused on empirical analysis, without identifying a specific algorithmic mechanism that results in this phenomenon. Thanks to the open-sourcing of X's recommendation algorithms, we conduct what is, to our knowledge, the first component-level study of the recommendation algorithm deployed by a social media platform, which examines how each of its components affects misinformation propagation. Specifically, we identify the engagement fungibility mechanism in the algorithm, where the final recommendation score is constructed as a weighted sum of all predicted user activities. As a result, a tweet can be repeatedly recommended simply because it is predicted to draw many instant reactions (e.g., likes and retweets), even when it is not expected to draw thoughtful responses (e.g., replies and quotes). Since misinformation typically draws a larger share of its engagement from instant reactions, this mechanism enables it to receive more recommendation exposure and to propagate faster. To empirically validate this mechanism, we re-implement X's recommendation algorithm on the USC X 2024 election corpus, and build a calibrated simulation study to analyze the impact of different scoring rules. We find that re-tuning the metric weights has little or even a negative impact on reducing the credibility exposure gap, while those scoring rules that set a precondition of thoughtful engagement for amplification would be able to alleviate the gap significantly, across 46 robustness checks. Our diagnosis, therefore, yields a simple and deployable fix, a reflective-threshold gate that withholds amplification until a tweet is predicted to draw thoughtful engagement, which we find to reallocate exposure away from low-credibility content at no cost to mainstream exposure and with no loss of engagement.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to measure public value orientations from long social media posts, yet such posts often mix background, quotations, concessions, and only a few stance-bearing sentences. Existing approaches either ask the model to predict a document-level label directly, which can be overconfident, or aggregate sentence-level predictions by majority or soft voting, which treat uncertain and decisive sentences as equally informative. We formulate long-text value measurement as a decision-fusion problem and propose Tempered Evidence Fusion (TEF), a training-free rule that weights each sentence's log-odds by its normalized information gain, as derived from a generalized Bayesian posterior. This makes the fused score nearly vanish for uncertain sentences while preserving the Bayes-optimal weight of decisive evidence. We further introduce Multi-event Insight Network Dimensions (MIND), a benchmark of 8,358 Chinese and English posts spanning five years of public events and six value dimensions. On MIND, TEF outperforms the strongest baseline among Direct, Majority Vote, and Soft Vote by an average of 4.5 accuracy points and 4.6 macro-F1 points across five LLMs and two languages. MIND dataset and code are available at https://github.com/Kzczc/ICASSP2027-TEF.

We introduce the Illinois Social Attitudes Aggregate Corpus (ISAAC), an open, modular, and accessible corpus of 527 million+ English-language Reddit posts selected for relevance to six key social group distinctions based on race, sexuality, age, ability, body weight, and skin tone, covering the 17-year period from 2007 to 2023. A multi-step, human-audited filtering pipeline was used to keep irrelevant content in the curated dataset below 10%, both overall and for each social group distinction. Each post was then algorithmically annotated with the user's estimated home region, along with a suite of validated off-the-shelf and custom semantic labels including moralization, sentiment, emotion, and linguistic generalization. We confirm the validity of the resulting corpus through convergent evidence linking ISAAC to macro-level societal trends, such as online search behavior, temporal spikes during major societal events (both nationally and regionally), and long-term shifts in public attitudes. By offering a unified, public infrastructure, ISAAC eliminates research fragmentation and enables seamless replication while supporting diverse empirical workflows at scale. Specifically, ISAAC allows investigators to perform cross-category comparisons, conduct high-precision tracking of long-term temporal shifts in social group discourse, and map spatial variation onto localized public opinion and policy outcomes. ISAAC's fully public, modular pipeline facilitates easy extension of the corpus to new platforms, languages, and social categories. To accommodate various research needs, ISAAC is accessible both without coding through a point-and-click website and labeler web-apps, and programmatically via an SQL playground, a Python package, and HuggingFace.

Adoption and diffusion of neologisms in online communities have received renewed attention in recent years. As internet slang terms such as APT, referring to a K-pop song, and phrases such as Canon Event meaning an embarrassing but pivotal event, go viral online, it becomes increasingly important to understand the mechanisms that contribute to their success. Prior studies have often explained slang diffusion either from the perspective of social interaction or from the linguistic properties of the slang itself, but rarely from both perspectives together. One major obstacle has been the high cost of annotating slang usage in large-scale online communication. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs), however, make it possible to use them as scalable annotators for such tasks. In this study, we first curate a human-annotated benchmark to evaluate LLM performance in detecting slang usage in real Reddit communication. We then leverage LLM-based annotations to model slang adoption and diffusion. Our results show that slang diffusers with higher bridging capital are associated with increased subsequent adoption, whereas diffusers with higher bonding capital are associated with reduced adoption. We also find that wider contextual usage of a slang term is associated with a longer time before new users officially adopt it. Together, these findings suggest that both social-network structure and linguistic context shape the diffusion of neologisms in online communities.

Social bot detection is essential for protecting online platforms from misinformation amplification, coordinated manipulation, and distorted public discourse. However, large language models have made social bots much harder to detect from text alone because semantic camouflage is now cheap, fluent, and scalable. The resulting challenge is modality conflict: an account may look human-like in semantics while remaining suspicious in graph structure, profile attributes, or cross-modal consistency. Recent graph-based detectors tackle this limitation by adding graph-side complexity, such as sparse prototype selection, adaptive gating, or architecture-specific control logic, yet our experiments suggest that complexity alone is not the most reliable way to resolve such conflict. We therefore propose CSC, a calibrated-simplicity framework for conflict-aware LLM-era social bot detection. The framework combines three design choices: a simplified prototype-guided graph expert that retains useful structural biases while removing unstable graph-side heuristics, calibrated simplex-constrained fusion that aligns heterogeneous confidence spaces before late fusion, and a lightweight inconsistency expert that models cross-modal disagreement. Experiments on TwiBot-22, TwiBot-20, and MGStBot-large show that \textsc{CSC} improves calibrated operating-point decision quality while remaining competitive across external benchmarks. Further analyses show that calibration improves confidence reliability, the inconsistency expert mainly provides localized corrections in high-conflict or near-threshold regions, and simplified graph-side control yields a better stability-cost trade-off. A targeted semantic-camouflage stress test further shows that replacing selected bot text with matched human text sharply degrades the standalone text expert while leaving graph and fused evidence stable on a balanced challenge set.

Communication is made possible by common ground---the unspoken knowledge that people share and presuppose of one another, whether that be online or offline. In his conception of common ground, Clark (1996) distinguishes between personal and communal common ground, and asserts that the latter is graded: the more community affiliations two people share, the more common ground they share as well. Social media research has invoked this mechanism to explain how users connect, but it has gone largely untested because community memberships are rarely visible and, where they are, they are coupled to user interactions in a way that leads to conflating effects. To circumvent these challenges, this study repurposes Bluesky starter packs (SPs) as user-curated community affiliation labels. Across 191,648 pairs of users, we show that shared lexical repertoire---our proxy for common ground---grows monotonically with the number of SPs that users share, with users sharing a single pack being roughly twice as similar as equally connected strangers. A semantic renormalization of SP co-membership shows furthermore that it is more so the number of topically \emph{distinct} communities, rather than the raw count, in which common ground is graded. Finally, we show that community co-membership adds to common ground independently of proximity in the Bluesky follow network. These results lead to the conclusion that community membership is a measurable, separable, and semantically structured carrier of common ground. Reading it as such makes common ground observable before an exchange rather than inferred from it, and thus opens the door for large-scale observational approaches to a set of questions that have so far only been posed in the laboratory.

In this paper, we study the detection of an echo chamber in a social network, i.e., the identification of a set of nodes that agree on a topic, while disagreeing with the rest of nodes. We argue that this problem is different from other social network analysis problems such as community detection, and from other graph problems such as maximum graph cut and maximum clique. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to formalize the objective function of echo chamber detection, by using the theory of Fourier transforms of set functions (Stobbe and Krause, 2012). We propose scalable semidefinite relaxation, solved via an interior point method and sparse linear algebra. Experimentally, our algorithm recovers the ground truth echo chamber better than competing methods on small synthetic experiments. Our algorithm produces echo chambers with better network properties than competing methods on large real-world datasets. To independently validate our proposed objective function, we show that our algorithm finds echo chambers with more agreements with suspended users than competing methods on a small real-world dataset.

Emotions are an essential aspect of human communication, particularly on social media, where authors frequently combine text and images to convey their emotions. Yet prior work on emotion analysis of social media posts has overlooked two important aspects in regard to measuring how well readers can reconstruct the authors' intent: (1)~the image modality, with most work focusing solely on text, and (2)~the real-world events that trigger the expressed emotions, and their relationship to the post content. We therefore study the relation between (a) the author's experience of the event that caused them to write a social media post and (b) the content of the post, with a focus on readers' capability to reconstruct that emotion expression. To do that, we introduce the Multimodal Multi-Emotion-Model dataset Mult2EMo, created by collecting annotations from both authors and readers on the posts and their triggering events. We find that reconstruction is possible but challenging for both human readers and computational models. We show that understanding the triggering event is crucial for accurate reconstruction, and that reconstruction is particularly challenging when posts rely heavily on the image to express emotion.

Social media platforms have become central to shaping political discourse, serving as arenas where narratives form and evolve, influencing public opinion. Identifying and analyzing these narratives, particularly when they compete across different political ideologies, is crucial for understanding the dynamics of modern political communication. This paper presents an unsupervised framework for identifying and characterizing competing narratives in political discourse on social media, focusing on German politicians' tweets. The framework employs a multi-stage pipeline that integrates natural language processing techniques such as topic modeling, event detection, and event linking. By forming data into coherent stories and uncovering the distinct perspectives of user communities, the system is able to detect the key competing narratives, highlighting the divergent framings and conflicts surrounding trending political topics. Two case studies on polarizing political issues demonstrate the efficacy of the methodology, showcasing its ability to uncover and analyze divergent viewpoints. The findings contribute to the broader understanding of how narratives propagate within the digital public sphere and offer insights for policymakers, social media platforms, and researchers interested in monitoring political discourse.

Moral language plays a central role in shaping online endorsement and the diffusion of information, yet existing moral foundation detection systems often suffer from poor cross-domain generalization, weak rationale grounding, and reliance on costly prompting-based large language models (LLMs). We introduce CHARM, a MAC- and Hate-speech-Aware Rationalealigned Moral foundation detection framework built on a lightweight fine-tuned LLM, which integrates complementary moral grounding, rationale alignment, and polarity-aware hate speech signals to support more robust and faithful moral prediction. Unlike prior dictionary-, fine-tune-, or prompt-based detectors, which decouple computation from psychological theory, CHARM is built so that each component -- MAC cross-attention, rationale alignment, and hate-speech modulation -- operationalizes a distinct psychological construct. Using a 30% subsample of the MFTC, MFRC, and News training pools together with the richer supervision in MFTCXplain, CHARM improves AUC by up to 15.3% in-domain, surpasses the supervised baselines on every out-of-domain dataset in both AUC and F1, and offers a scalable, low-cost alternative to prompting-based LLM detectors. We further apply CHARM to large-scale COVID-19 discourse on Twitter and show that moral value alignment is strongly associated with online endorsement behavior. By making moral framing measurable at scale, CHARM offers a practical tool for studying the spread of morally charged misinformation. Code and additional materials: https://github.com/HuixiangF/CHARM/.

Ragebait refers to online content intentionally designed to provoke anger or outrage and thereby increase attention and engagement. However, reliable large-scale detection and systematic analysis of ragebait remain limited, hindering efforts to understand its prevalence, impact, and mitigation. This study aims to develop an effective ragebait detection framework and to clarify the characteristics of ragebait at scale, providing a basis for understanding and mitigating emotionally provocative content online. We constructed a labeled dataset with the assistance of a large language model (LLM) and trained several Japanese language models for ragebait detection. The resulting ensemble classifier was then applied to a large-scale dataset of Japanese-language posts on X. Our analysis shows that ragebait is more prevalent in politically and socially contentious topics, including politics, discrimination, public health, and interpersonal conflict. Ragebait posts also spread faster and receive more negative reactions than non-ragebait posts, particularly anger, fear, disgust, sadness, and surprise. These findings demonstrate the utility of the proposed detector and provide a large-scale characterization of ragebait in Japanese online discourse.

As far-right actors increasingly exploit online platforms to disseminate ideology and mobilize supporters, civil society organizations (CSOs) play a vital yet underrecognized role in monitoring antidemocratic dynamics online. Unlike fact-checkers or content moderators, CSOs engage in long-term, contextualized analysis, often in resource-constrained settings and under precarious conditions. Despite their critical societal role, CSOs face significant barriers to adopting or co-developing technical solutions, including legal uncertainty, limited platform access, and chronic underfunding. Existing research and tool development efforts have largely overlooked these actors in favor of more institutionally embedded stakeholders. This paper addresses this gap through a qualitative study with 15 practitioners from 12 Germany-based CSOs engaged in online monitoring, positioning them as key yet overlooked stakeholders in the governance of digital spaces. We explore their current practices, challenges, and expectations regarding technological support. Our findings show that monitoring remains largely manual due to the lack of tailored tools, with enhanced search capabilities emerging as the most pressing technical need. While participants express openness to AI-supported features such as media processing and content discovery, many remain skeptical of automated classification, citing concerns around trust, legal usability, and professional credibility. Grounded in these findings, we introduce a conceptual monitoring workflow and describe its implementation in an open-source Telegram monitoring prototype designed to flexibly support diverse monitoring goals. We outline concrete design, policy, and research recommendatios, and introduce the manual labor trap as an empirically grounded concept that explains why monitoring CSOs tend to remain locked into labor-intensive, low-capacity arrangements.

Online communities increasingly provide spaces where survivors of sexual violence can share their experiences and seek support. Although prior research has examined stigma and social support separately, less is known about how stigma expressed in survivor narratives relates to the support offered in response. We introduce the SCOPE dataset, linking stigma signals in online survivor narratives to support types in corresponding comment threads. We annotate posts using a multi-dimensional stigma taxonomy, including Experienced, Internalized, Anticipated, and Structural Stigma, and comments using a support taxonomy encompassing Information Support, Emotional Support, Esteem Support, Tangible Assistance, and Group Interaction. Using contextual, linguistic, and emotion analyses, we compare Stigma and No Stigma content and find that Stigma narratives place greater emphasis on internalized distress, whereas No Stigma narratives focus more on interpreting situations and experiences. Internalized Stigma is the most prevalent category, and community responses remain broadly stable across stigma types, with Information and Esteem Support appearing most often. These findings show how stigma shapes survivor narratives and peer responses and have implications for computational modeling, content moderation, and safer online systems.

The rapid growth of social media has created vast amounts of political discourse, which provides valuable opportunities to analyze public opinions and identify different political perspectives. Sentiment Analysis (SA) is a core task in Natural Language Processing (NLP) that allows the computational study of attitudes and opinions in textual data, and has become increasingly important for understanding political discourse. In this work, we investigate multiclass sentiment analysis of political view- points on social media, that is to automatically discriminate multiple sentiment classes over political issues and figures. To solve this task we design and evaluate two machine-learning approaches based on XGBoost and BERT. We train and evaluate the models on a labeled dataset of political social media posts using standard classification metrics. The experimental results show that the XGBoost model reaches an F1-score of 0.2835 and the BERT- based model reaches an F1-score of 0.2806 on the test set. These results demonstrate the challenge of classifying complex and contextualized political discourse sentiment and provide a baseline for future research in multiclass political sentiment analysis.

Social media has become a major venue for multilingual communication, where users frequently mix multiple languages within a single utterance. Although code-mixed corpora have been developed for several language pairs, Persian-English code-mixing remains relatively underexplored. Existing Persian resources lack Universal Dependencies (UD) part-of-speech (POS) annotations for code-mixed words, limiting both linguistic analyses and the development of syntax-aware NLP models. To address this gap, we introduce PERCEPT, the first publicly available large-scale Persian-English code-mixed corpus annotated with Universal Dependencies POS tags for code-mixed words. The dataset comprises 6,800 posts collected from X, Instagram, and Digikala. We further present an LLM-assisted annotation framework that automatically assigns POS tags and document-level topics. Human evaluation demonstrates high agreement between the automatically generated annotations and gold annotations, confirming the reliability of the annotations. Using PERCEPT, we conduct the first comprehensive linguistic analysis of Persian-English code-mixing across multiple social media platforms. Our analyses reveal that nouns are the predominant category for code-mixed words, while the distributions of other POS categories vary across platforms. We further find that the positional distribution of code-mixed words is remarkably consistent across platforms, whereas the triggering effect is substantially more pronounced in Digikala. PERCEPT is publicly available at https://github.com/kalhorghazal/PERCEPT.

Online social networks increasingly expose people to users who propagate discriminatory, hateful, and violent content. Young users, in particular, are vulnerable to exposure to such content, which can have harmful psychological and social repercussions. Given the massive scale of today's social networks, in terms of both published content and number of users, there is an urgent need for effective systems to aid Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) in identifying and addressing users that disseminate malicious content. In this work we introduce IMMENSE, a machine learning-based method for detecting malicious social network users. Our approach adopts a hybrid classification strategy that integrates three perspectives: the semantics of the users' published content, their social relationships and their spatial information. Such contextual perspectives potentially enhance classification performance beyond text-only analysis. Importantly, IMMENSE employs an inductive learning approach, enabling it to classify previously unseen users or entire new networks without the need for costly and time-consuming model retraining procedures. Experiments carried out on a real-world Twitter/X dataset showed the superiority of IMMENSE against five state of the art competitors, confirming the benefits of its hybrid approach for effective deployment in social network monitoring systems.

Social media recommendation feeds often optimize for users' immediate impulses rather than preferences they would hold after deeper reflection. Some systems address this misalignment by incorporating users' explicit preferences via a configuration page or in-feed controls instead of just behavioral signals. However, users typically have evolving preferences, and their stated preferences and behavior naturally diverge, necessitating continuous reflection and feed realignment. But existing strategies require the user to take initiative and are often effortful; as a result, in practice they are rarely invoked. We present Compass, a system that aligns a user's feed with their reflective preferences by helping users reflect on and articulate their preferences given their behavior. To enable continuous reflection during everyday browsing, Compass surfaces in-situ reflections via lightweight notifications, while feed alignment is achieved by periodically simulating behavioral signals and directly manipulating feed content. We embedded Compass within YouTube Shorts and compared it against a baseline without continuous support through a 10-day field study (N=15). We found that Compass promoted more reflective and purposeful feed consumption, iterative preference adjustment, and stronger feed alignment, without sacrificing the casual nature of feed browsing.

The rapid dissemination of multimodal content has intensified the spread of fabricated news, presenting a substantial threat to social integrity. A formidable challenge for current detection systems is identifying misinformation related to novel events in zero-shot scenarios. Prevailing zero-shot methods typically assess news items in isolation via semantic matching, a strategy that fails to recognize the recycled disinformation tactics from past campaigns and lacks the sophisticated reasoning needed to identify subtle, cross-modal discrepancies. To surmount these deficiencies, we introduce \textbf{MRAFnd}, a novel \underline{\textbf{M}}ultimodal \underline{\textbf{R}}etrieval-\underline{\textbf{A}}ugmented Framework for Zero-Shot \underline{\textbf{F}}ake \underline{\textbf{N}}ews \underline{\textbf{D}}etection. MRAFnd emulates a collaborative team of analysts to verify news veracity. The framework initiates with \textbf{Multimodal Similarity-based News Retrieval} to assemble a corpus of contextually analogous articles from an unlabeled reference database. Subsequently, during the \textbf{Bifurcated Evidential Reasoning} stage, agents perform a dual-directional analysis to extract critical patterns from the retrieved evidence. Finally, a \textbf{Multi-Agent Collaborative Debate}, involving Analyst and Arbiter agents, engages in a structured discourse to arrive at a definitive and robust conclusion. Comprehensive experiments on three benchmark datasets reveal that MRAFnd markedly surpasses state-of-the-art baselines, achieving an accuracy gain of up to 2.35% on the demanding Weibo-21 dataset.

Social media affect financial markets, but public posts by financial media personas are voluntary disclosures. What is not disclosed is therefore usually unobserved. We address this measurement problem by conducting repeated, real-time interviews of "digital twins" built from monitored finfluencers' X accounts under a fixed protocol. The interviews recover stock-level public-persona belief proxies even when no public recommendation is made. Because the interviews are generated and archived before the relevant return windows, the design avoids the look-ahead bias that arises when LLMs are queried ex post. The evidence shows that information obtained from these digital-twin interviews predicts the cross section of large-cap stock returns in the expected direction. Repeated real-time interviews therefore show how selective disclosure can be turned into measurable panels of market views.

Political polarization has become a defining feature of online discourse, yet its long-term evolution remains poorly understood. We present a longitudinal analysis of ideological polarization in Reddit discussions by measuring semantic differences in the language used by opposing political communities. We construct temporally aligned community-specific word embeddings and quantify ideological polarization as the semantic divergence of political concepts over time. Our analysis shows that ideological polarization has increased substantially during the study period, both at the concept- and topic-level. Unlike prior computational work, which has largely focused on cross-sectional analyses or affective dimensions of polarization at a single point at time, our approach captures the evolution of ideological differences in semantic framing. The proposed framework provides a scalable method for studying the temporal dynamics of ideological polarization in large-scale social media discourse.

The suicide is a terrifying act of a person who is misled by his own mental state. This problem arises across many countries. Sadly, Russia also has quite high number of persons who committed suicide. Luckily, a subset of these people writes their struggles in social media, allowing a way to find them and help. However, these valuable texts disappearing in many irrelevant texts which is considerably slowing down the decision process about person's suicidal risk. To tackle this problem, in this work we have presented a detailed methodology of building the dataset for detecting texts that describe presuicidal and anti-suicidal signals. This methodology describes the process of instruction and class table creation, the process of annotation, verification and post-annotation correction. Guiding by this methodology, we collect and annotate a large-scale Russian dataset with more than 50 thousand texts from social media. We provide a count statistic of the dataset as well as common problems in annotation. We also conduct basic experiments of building the classification models to show the on go performance on different levels of annotation. Furthermore, we make the dataset, code and all materials publicly available.

Early detection of mental health disorders is often limited by the lack of specialized resources in Spanish and the difficulty of analyzing long histories of social media posts. This paper addresses these challenges through three main contributions. First, we introduce three Spanish foundational models specifically adapted to the mental health domain through domain-specific pre-training. Second, we propose Incremental Context Expansion (ICE), an automatic relabeling methodology designed for early detection. ICE identifies the point at which cumulative messages provide enough evidence of a disorder, generating more informative training samples. Third, we provide a set of fine-tuned models using the samples generated with the ICE methodology for early risk detection tasks. Our results on three Spanish benchmarks show that combining these specialized models with ICE improves the state-of-the-art, reducing detection latency while maintaining high performance. All models are publicly available.