arXiv subjects

Ashiqur R. KhudaBukhsh

Publications and source records attributed to Ashiqur R. KhudaBukhsh.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Two Centuries of Sexism in British Parliament: A Computational Analysis of Women's Representation in the Hansard Corpus

The language a legislature uses to debate women's rights, even in favour of them, encodes systematic patterns of sexism that persist across two centuries. In this work, we analyse 6,531 speeches over 200 years of UK parliamentary debate (Hansard, 1803-2005) by using large language models to classify a speaker's perspective towards women's suffrage and political representation, as well as analyse sexist speech in parliament from the lens of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. We also release this parliamentary dataset, an organized and metadata-enriched version of the publicly available Hansard Corpus optimized for computational social science research, with 6.7 million speeches across 1.2 million debates, with 89% gender-matching for speeches by MPs from the House of Commons. We find that 54% of speeches opposing women's representation contain sexist content, compared to 21% of speeches that are for the cause, and that the two sides use fundamentally different types of sexism: anti-suffrage rhetoric combines hostile and benevolent framing, while pro-suffrage sexism is overwhelmingly benevolent. Female MPs support women's political rights at 93% compared to 70% for male MPs, a gap that closes only after enfranchisement. Our findings are evidence that benevolent and hostile sexism are used in different rhetorical contexts in a manner consistent with the theory of Ambivalent Sexism.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Investigating Vaccine Buyer's Remorse: Post-Vaccination Decision Regret in COVID-19 Social Media Using Politically Diverse Human Annotation

A significant gap exists in datasets regarding post-COVID-19 vaccination experiences, particularly ``vaccine buyer's remorse''. Understanding the prevalence and nature of vaccine regret, whether based on personal or vicarious experiences, is vital for addressing vaccine hesitancy and refining public health communication. In this paper, we curate a novel dataset from a large YouTube news corpus capturing COVID-19 vaccination experiences, and construct a benchmark subset focused on vaccine regret, annotated by a politically diverse panel to account for the subjective and often politicized nature of the topic. We utilize large language models (LLMs) to identify posts expressing vaccine regret, analyze the reasons behind this regret, and quantify its occurrence in both first and second-person accounts. This paper aims to (1) quantify the prevalence of vaccine regret; (2) identify common reasons for this sentiment; (3) analyze differences between first-person and vicarious experiences; and (4) assess potential biases introduced by different LLMs. We find that while vaccine buyer's remorse appears in only $<2\%$ of public discourse, it is disproportionately concentrated in vaccine-skeptic influencer communities and is predominantly expressed through first-person narratives citing adverse health events.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Vicarious Offense and Noise Audit of Offensive Speech Classifiers: Unifying Human and Machine Disagreement on What is Offensive

Offensive speech detection is a key component of content moderation. However, what is offensive can be highly subjective. This paper investigates how machine and human moderators disagree on what is offensive when it comes to real-world social web political discourse. We show that (1) there is extensive disagreement among the moderators (humans and machines); and (2) human and large-language-model classifiers are unable to predict how other human raters will respond, based on their political leanings. For (1), we conduct a noise audit at an unprecedented scale that combines both machine and human responses. For (2), we introduce a first-of-its-kind dataset of vicarious offense. Our noise audit reveals that moderation outcomes vary wildly across different machine moderators. Our experiments with human moderators suggest that political leanings combined with sensitive issues affect both first-person and vicarious offense. The dataset is available through https://github.com/Homan-Lab/voiced.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Navigating the Rabbit Hole: Emergent Biases in LLM-Generated Attack Narratives Targeting Mental Health Groups

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to demonstrate imbalanced biases against certain groups. However, the study of unprovoked targeted attacks by LLMs towards at-risk populations remains underexplored. Our paper presents three novel contributions: (1) the explicit evaluation of LLM-generated attacks on highly vulnerable mental health groups; (2) a network-based framework to study the propagation of relative biases; and (3) an assessment of the relative degree of stigmatization that emerges from these attacks. Our analysis of a recently released large-scale bias audit dataset reveals that mental health entities occupy central positions within attack narrative networks, as revealed by a significantly higher mean centrality of closeness (p-value = 4.06e-10) and dense clustering (Gini coefficient = 0.7). Drawing from an established stigmatization framework, our analysis indicates increased labeling components for mental health disorder-related targets relative to initial targets in generation chains. Taken together, these insights shed light on the structural predilections of large language models to heighten harmful discourse and highlight the need for suitable approaches for mitigation.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

What About the Scene with the Hitler Reference? HAUNT: A Framework to Probe LLMs' Self-consistency Via Adversarial Nudge

Hallucinations pose a critical challenge to the real-world deployment of large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes domains. In this paper, we present a framework for stress testing factual fidelity in LLMs in the presence of adversarial nudge. Our framework consists of three steps. In the first step, we instruct the LLM to produce sets of truths and lies consistent with the closed domain in question. In the next step, we instruct the LLM to verify the same set of assertions as truths and lies consistent with the same closed domain. In the final step, we test the robustness of the LLM against the lies generated (and verified) by itself. Our extensive evaluation, conducted using five widely known proprietary LLMs across two closed domains of popular movies and novels, reveals a wide range of susceptibility to adversarial nudges: \texttt{Claude} exhibits strong resilience, \texttt{GPT} and \texttt{Grok} demonstrate moderate resilience, while \texttt{Gemini} and \texttt{DeepSeek} show weak resilience. Considering that a large population is increasingly using LLMs for information seeking, our findings raise alarm.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Hope vs. Hate: Understanding User Interactions with LGBTQ+ News Content in Mainstream US News Media through the Lens of Hope Speech

This paper makes three contributions. First, via a substantial corpus of 1,419,047 comments posted on 3,161 YouTube news videos of major US cable news outlets, we analyze how users engage with LGBTQ+ news content. Our analyses focus both on positive and negative content. In particular, we construct a fine-grained hope speech classifier that detects positive (hope speech), negative, neutral, and irrelevant content. Second, in consultation with a public health expert specializing on LGBTQ+ health, we conduct an annotation study with a balanced and diverse political representation and release a dataset of 3,750 instances with fine-grained labels and detailed annotator demographic information. Finally, beyond providing a vital resource for the LGBTQ+ community, our annotation study and subsequent in-the-wild assessments reveal (1) strong association between rater political beliefs and how they rate content relevant to a marginalized community; (2) models trained on individual political beliefs exhibit considerable in-the-wild disagreement; and (3) zero-shot large language models (LLMs) align more with liberal raters.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Datasets for Depression Modeling in Social Media: An Overview

Depression is the most common mental health disorder, and its prevalence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. As one of the most extensively researched psychological conditions, recent research has increasingly focused on leveraging social media data to enhance traditional methods of depression screening. This paper addresses the growing interest in interdisciplinary research on depression, and aims to support early-career researchers by providing a comprehensive and up-to-date list of datasets for analyzing and predicting depression through social media data. We present an overview of datasets published between 2019 and 2024. We also make the comprehensive list of datasets available online as a continuously updated resource, with the hope that it will facilitate further interdisciplinary research into the linguistic expressions of depression on social media.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

On the State of NLP Approaches to Modeling Depression in Social Media: A Post-COVID-19 Outlook

Computational approaches to predicting mental health conditions in social media have been substantially explored in the past years. Multiple reviews have been published on this topic, providing the community with comprehensive accounts of the research in this area. Among all mental health conditions, depression is the most widely studied due to its worldwide prevalence. The COVID-19 global pandemic, starting in early 2020, has had a great impact on mental health worldwide. Harsh measures employed by governments to slow the spread of the virus (e.g., lockdowns) and the subsequent economic downturn experienced in many countries have significantly impacted people's lives and mental health. Studies have shown a substantial increase of above 50% in the rate of depression in the population. In this context, we present a review on natural language processing (NLP) approaches to modeling depression in social media, providing the reader with a post-COVID-19 outlook. This review contributes to the understanding of the impacts of the pandemic on modeling depression in social media. We outline how state-of-the-art approaches and new datasets have been used in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, we also discuss ethical issues in collecting and processing mental health data, considering fairness, accountability, and ethics.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Rater Cohesion and Quality from a Vicarious Perspective

Human feedback is essential for building human-centered AI systems across domains where disagreement is prevalent, such as AI safety, content moderation, or sentiment analysis. Many disagreements, particularly in politically charged settings, arise because raters have opposing values or beliefs. Vicarious annotation is a method for breaking down disagreement by asking raters how they think others would annotate the data. In this paper, we explore the use of vicarious annotation with analytical methods for moderating rater disagreement. We employ rater cohesion metrics to study the potential influence of political affiliations and demographic backgrounds on raters' perceptions of offense. Additionally, we utilize CrowdTruth's rater quality metrics, which consider the demographics of the raters, to score the raters and their annotations. We study how the rater quality metrics influence the in-group and cross-group rater cohesion across the personal and vicarious levels.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Gender Representation and Bias in Indian Civil Service Mock Interviews

This paper makes three key contributions. First, via a substantial corpus of 51,278 interview questions sourced from 888 YouTube videos of mock interviews of Indian civil service candidates, we demonstrate stark gender bias in the broad nature of questions asked to male and female candidates. Second, our experiments with large language models show a strong presence of gender bias in explanations provided by the LLMs on the gender inference task. Finally, we present a novel dataset of 51,278 interview questions that can inform future social science studies.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

ARTICLE: Annotator Reliability Through In-Context Learning

Ensuring annotator quality in training and evaluation data is a key piece of machine learning in NLP. Tasks such as sentiment analysis and offensive speech detection are intrinsically subjective, creating a challenging scenario for traditional quality assessment approaches because it is hard to distinguish disagreement due to poor work from that due to differences of opinions between sincere annotators. With the goal of increasing diverse perspectives in annotation while ensuring consistency, we propose \texttt{ARTICLE}, an in-context learning (ICL) framework to estimate annotation quality through self-consistency. We evaluate this framework on two offensive speech datasets using multiple LLMs and compare its performance with traditional methods. Our findings indicate that \texttt{ARTICLE} can be used as a robust method for identifying reliable annotators, hence improving data quality.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Down the Toxicity Rabbit Hole: A Novel Framework to Bias Audit Large Language Models

This paper makes three contributions. First, it presents a generalizable, novel framework dubbed \textit{toxicity rabbit hole} that iteratively elicits toxic content from a wide suite of large language models. Spanning a set of 1,266 identity groups, we first conduct a bias audit of \texttt{PaLM 2} guardrails presenting key insights. Next, we report generalizability across several other models. Through the elicited toxic content, we present a broad analysis with a key emphasis on racism, antisemitism, misogyny, Islamophobia, homophobia, and transphobia. Finally, driven by concrete examples, we discuss potential ramifications.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Community Needs and Assets: A Computational Analysis of Community Conversations

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Infrastructure Ombudsman: Mining Future Failure Concerns from Structural Disaster Response

Current 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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Auditing and Robustifying COVID-19 Misinformation Datasets via Anticontent Sampling

This paper makes two key contributions. First, it argues that highly specialized rare content classifiers trained on small data typically have limited exposure to the richness and topical diversity of the negative class (dubbed anticontent) as observed in the wild. As a result, these classifiers' strong performance observed on the test set may not translate into real-world settings. In the context of COVID-19 misinformation detection, we conduct an in-the-wild audit of multiple datasets and demonstrate that models trained with several prominently cited recent datasets are vulnerable to anticontent when evaluated in the wild. Second, we present a novel active learning pipeline that requires zero manual annotation and iteratively augments the training data with challenging anticontent, robustifying these classifiers.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Disentangling Societal Inequality from Model Biases: Gender Inequality in Divorce Court Proceedings

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

For Women, Life, Freedom: A Participatory AI-Based Social Web Analysis of a Watershed Moment in Iran's Gender Struggles

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Subjective Crowd Disagreements for Subjective Data: Uncovering Meaningful CrowdOpinion with Population-level Learning

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.

cs.IR↗