SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Bennett Kleinberg

Publications and source records attributed to Bennett Kleinberg.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Improving Explanations: Applying the Feature Understandability Scale for Cost-Sensitive Feature Selection

With the growing pervasiveness of artificial intelligence, the ability to explain the inferences made by machine learning models has become increasingly important. Numerous techniques for model explainability have been proposed, with natural-language textual explanations among the most widely used approaches. When applied to tabular data, these explanations typically draw on input features to justify a given inference. Consequently, a user's ability to interpret the explanation depends on their understanding of the input features. To quantify this feature-level understanding, Rossberg et al. introduced the Feature Understandability Scale. Building on that work, this proof-of-concept study collects understandability scores across two datasets, proposes a co-optimisation methodology of understandability and accuracy and presents the resulting explanations alongside the model accuracies. This work contributes to the body of knowledge on model interpretability by design. It is found that accuracy and understandability can be successfully co-optimised while maintaining high classification performances. The resulting explanations are considered more understandable at face value. Further research will aim to confirm these findings through user evaluation.

cs.HC

Prosocial Persuasion at Scale? Large Language Models Outperform Humans in Donation Appeals Across Levels of Personalization

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly regarded as having the potential to generate persuasive content at scale. While previous studies have focused on the risks associated with LLM-generated misinformation, the role of LLMs in enabling prosocial persuasion is still underexplored. We investigate whether donation appeals authored by LLMs are as effective as those written by humans across degrees of personalization. Two preregistered online experiments (Study 1: N = 658; Study 2: N = 642) manipulated Personalization (generic vs. personalized vs. falsely personalized) and Content source (human vs. LLM) and presented participants with donation appeals for charities. We assessed how participants distributed their bonus money across the charities, how they engaged with the donation appeals, and how persuasive they found them. In both experiments, LLM-generated content yielded statistically significantly higher donation amounts than human-authored content, although the absolute differences were small; it also resulted in higher engagement and was rated as more persuasive. There was a gain associated with personalization (Study 2) and a penalty for false personalization (Study 1). Our results suggest that LLMs may be a suitable technology for generating content that can encourage prosocial behavior.

cs.CY

Human attribution of empathic behaviour to AI systems

Artificial intelligence systems increasingly generate text intended to provide social and emotional support. Understanding how users perceive empathic qualities in such content is therefore critical. We examined differences in perceived empathy signals between human-written and large language model (LLM)-generated relationship advice, and the influence of authorship labels. Across two preregistered experiments (Study 1: n = 641; Study 2: n = 500), participants rated advice texts on overall quality and perceived cognitive, emotional, and motivational empathy. Multilevel models accounted for the nested rating structure. LLM-generated advice was consistently perceived as higher in overall quality, cognitive empathy, and motivational empathy. Evidence for a widely reported negativity bias toward AI-labelled content was limited. Emotional empathy showed no consistent source advantage. Individual differences in AI attitudes modestly influenced judgments but did not alter the overall pattern. These findings suggest that perceptions of empathic communication are primarily driven by linguistic features rather than authorship beliefs, with implications for the design of AI-mediated support systems.

cs.CY

Humans incorrectly reject confident accusatory AI judgments

Automated verbal deception detection using methods from Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been shown to outperform humans in disentangling lies from truths. Research suggests that transparency and interpretability of computational methods tend to increase human acceptance of using AI to support decisions. However, the extent to which humans accept AI judgments for deception detection remains unclear. We experimentally examined how an AI model's accuracy (i.e., its overall performance in deception detection) and confidence (i.e., the model's uncertainty in single-statements predictions) influence human adoption of the model's judgments. Participants (n=373) were presented with veracity judgments of an AI model with high or low overall accuracy and various degrees of prediction confidence. The results showed that humans followed predictions from a highly accurate model more than from a less accurate one. Interestingly, the more confident the model, the more people deviated from it, especially if the model predicted deception. We also found that human interaction with algorithmic predictions either worsened the machine's performance or was ineffective. While this human aversion to accept highly confident algorithmic predictions was partly explained by participants' tendency to overestimate humans' deception detection abilities, we also discuss how truth-default theory and the social costs of accusing someone of lying help explain the findings.

cs.HC

The Feature Understandability Scale for Human-Centred Explainable AI: Assessing Tabular Feature Importance

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly pervasive and powerful, the ability to audit AI-based systems is growing in importance. However, explainability for artificial intelligence systems is not a one-size-fits-all solution; different target audiences have varying requirements and expectations for explanations. While various approaches to explainability have been proposed, most explainable artificial intelligence methods for tabular data focus on explaining the outputs of supervised machine learning models using the input features. However, a user's ability to understand an explanation depends on their understanding of such features. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the system designer to try to pre-select understandable features for producing a global explanation of an ML model. Unfortunately, no measure currently exists to assess the degree to which a user understands a given input feature. This work introduces two psychometrically validated scales that quantitatively seek to assess users' understanding of tabular input features for supervised classification problems. Specifically, these scales, one for numerical and one for categorical data, each with two factors and comprising 8 and 9 items, aim to assign a score to each input feature, effectively producing a rank, and allowing for the quantification of feature prioritisation. A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrates a strong relationship between such items and a good fit of the two-factor structure for each scale. This research presents a novel method for assessing understanding and outlines potential applications in the domain of explainable artificial intelligence.

cs.HC

Translating the Grievance Dictionary: a psychometric evaluation of Dutch, German, and Italian versions

This paper introduces and evaluates three translations of the Grievance Dictionary, a psycholinguistic dictionary for the analysis of violent, threatening or grievance-fuelled texts. Considering the relevance of these themes in languages beyond English, we translated the Grievance Dictionary to Dutch, German, and Italian. We describe the process of automated translation supplemented by human annotation. Psychometric analyses are performed, including internal reliability of dictionary categories and correlations with the LIWC dictionary. The Dutch and German translations perform similarly to the original English version, whereas the Italian dictionary shows low reliability for some categories. Finally, we make suggestions for further validation and application of the dictionary, as well as for future dictionary translations following a similar approach.

cs.CL

Conflicts of Interest in Published NLP Research 2000-2024

Natural Language Processing research is increasingly reliant on large scale data and computational power. Many achievements in the past decade resulted from collaborations with the tech industry. But an increasing entanglement of academic research and industry interests leads to conflicts of interest. We assessed published NLP research from 2000-2024 and labeled author affiliations as academic or industry-affiliated to measure conflicts of interest. Overall 27.65% of the papers contained at least one industry-affiliated author. That figure increased substantially with more than 1 in 3 papers having a conflict of interest in 2024. We identify top-tier venues (ACL, EMNLP) as main drivers for that effect. The paper closes with a discussion and a simple, concrete suggestion for the future.

cs.CL

When lies are mostly truthful: automated verbal deception detection for embedded lies

Background: Verbal deception detection research relies on narratives and commonly assumes statements as truthful or deceptive. A more realistic perspective acknowledges that the veracity of statements exists on a continuum with truthful and deceptive parts being embedded within the same statement. However, research on embedded lies has been lagging behind. Methods: We collected a novel dataset of 2,088 truthful and deceptive statements with annotated embedded lies. Using a within-subjects design, participants provided a truthful account of an autobiographical event. They then rewrote their statement in a deceptive manner by including embedded lies, which they highlighted afterwards and judged on lie centrality, deceptiveness, and source. Results: We show that a fined-tuned language model (Llama-3-8B) can classify truthful statements and those containing embedded lies with 64% accuracy. Individual differences, linguistic properties and explainability analysis suggest that the challenge of moving the dial towards embedded lies stems from their resemblance to truthful statements. Typical deceptive statements consisted of 2/3 truthful information and 1/3 embedded lies, largely derived from past personal experiences and with minimal linguistic differences with their truthful counterparts. Conclusion: We present this dataset as a novel resource to address this challenge and foster research on embedded lies in verbal deception detection.

cs.CL

Effective faking of verbal deception detection with target-aligned adversarial attacks

Background: Deception detection through analysing language is a promising avenue using both human judgments and automated machine learning judgments. For both forms of credibility assessment, automated adversarial attacks that rewrite deceptive statements to appear truthful pose a serious threat. Methods: We used a dataset of 243 truthful and 262 fabricated autobiographical stories in a deception detection task for humans and machine learning models. A large language model was tasked to rewrite deceptive statements so that they appear truthful. In Study 1, humans who made a deception judgment or used the detailedness heuristic and two machine learning models (a fine-tuned language model and a simple n-gram model) judged original or adversarial modifications of deceptive statements. In Study 2, we manipulated the target alignment of the modifications, i.e. tailoring the attack to whether the statements would be assessed by humans or computer models. Results: When adversarial modifications were aligned with their target, human (d=-0.07 and d=-0.04) and machine judgments (51% accuracy) dropped to the chance level. When the attack was not aligned with the target, both human heuristics judgments (d=0.30 and d=0.36) and machine learning predictions (63-78%) were significantly better than chance. Conclusions: Easily accessible language models can effectively help anyone fake deception detection efforts both by humans and machine learning models. Robustness against adversarial modifications for humans and machines depends on that target alignment. We close with suggestions on advancing deception research with adversarial attack designs and techniques.

cs.CL

Linguistic traces of stochastic empathy in language models

Differentiating generated and human-written content is increasingly difficult. We examine how an incentive to convey humanness and task characteristics shape this human vs AI race across five studies. In Study 1-2 (n=530 and n=610) humans and a large language model (LLM) wrote relationship advice or relationship descriptions, either with or without instructions to sound human. New participants (n=428 and n=408) judged each text's source. Instructions to sound human were only effective for the LLM, reducing the human advantage. Study 3 (n=360 and n=350) showed that these effects persist when writers were instructed to avoid sounding like an LLM. Study 4 (n=219) tested empathy as mechanism of humanness and concluded that LLMs can produce empathy without humanness and humanness without empathy. Finally, computational text analysis (Study 5) indicated that LLMs become more human-like by applying an implicit representation of humanness to mimic stochastic empathy.

cs.CL

Cognitive phantoms in LLMs through the lens of latent variables

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly reach real-world applications, necessitating a better understanding of their behaviour. Their size and complexity complicate traditional assessment methods, causing the emergence of alternative approaches inspired by the field of psychology. Recent studies administering psychometric questionnaires to LLMs report human-like traits in LLMs, potentially influencing LLM behaviour. However, this approach suffers from a validity problem: it presupposes that these traits exist in LLMs and that they are measurable with tools designed for humans. Typical procedures rarely acknowledge the validity problem in LLMs, comparing and interpreting average LLM scores. This study investigates this problem by comparing latent structures of personality between humans and three LLMs using two validated personality questionnaires. Findings suggest that questionnaires designed for humans do not validly measure similar constructs in LLMs, and that these constructs may not exist in LLMs at all, highlighting the need for psychometric analyses of LLM responses to avoid chasing cognitive phantoms. Keywords: large language models, psychometrics, machine behaviour, latent variable modeling, validity

cs.AI

From cryptomarkets to the surface web: Scouting eBay for counterfeits

Detecting counterfeits on online marketplaces is challenging, and current methods struggle with the volume of sales on platforms like eBay, while cryptomarkets openly sell counterfeits. Leveraging information from 453 cryptomarket counterfeits, we automated a search for corresponding products on eBay, utilizing image and text similarity metrics. We collected data twice over 4-months to analyze changes with an average of 159 eBay products per cryptomarket item, totaling 134k products. We found identical products, which would warrant further investigation as to whether they are counterfeits. Results indicate increasing difficulty finding similar products over time, moderated by product type and origin. Future improved versions of the current system could be used to examine possible connections between cryptomarket and surface web listings more closely and could hold practical value in supporting the detection of counterfeits on the surface web.

cs.SI

Use of LLMs for Illicit Purposes: Threats, Prevention Measures, and Vulnerabilities

Spurred by the recent rapid increase in the development and distribution of large language models (LLMs) across industry and academia, much recent work has drawn attention to safety- and security-related threats and vulnerabilities of LLMs, including in the context of potentially criminal activities. Specifically, it has been shown that LLMs can be misused for fraud, impersonation, and the generation of malware; while other authors have considered the more general problem of AI alignment. It is important that developers and practitioners alike are aware of security-related problems with such models. In this paper, we provide an overview of existing - predominantly scientific - efforts on identifying and mitigating threats and vulnerabilities arising from LLMs. We present a taxonomy describing the relationship between threats caused by the generative capabilities of LLMs, prevention measures intended to address such threats, and vulnerabilities arising from imperfect prevention measures. With our work, we hope to raise awareness of the limitations of LLMs in light of such security concerns, among both experienced developers and novel users of such technologies.

cs.CL

Large Language Models in Cryptocurrency Securities Cases: Can a GPT Model Meaningfully Assist Lawyers?

Large Language Models (LLMs) could be a useful tool for lawyers. However, empirical research on their effectiveness in conducting legal tasks is scant. We study securities cases involving cryptocurrencies as one of numerous contexts where AI could support the legal process, studying GPT-3.5's legal reasoning and ChatGPT's legal drafting capabilities. We examine whether a) GPT-3.5 can accurately determine which laws are potentially being violated from a fact pattern, and b) whether there is a difference in juror decision-making based on complaints written by a lawyer compared to ChatGPT. We feed fact patterns from real-life cases to GPT-3.5 and evaluate its ability to determine correct potential violations from the scenario and exclude spurious violations. Second, we had mock jurors assess complaints written by ChatGPT and lawyers. GPT-3.5's legal reasoning skills proved weak, though we expect improvement in future models, particularly given the violations it suggested tended to be correct (it merely missed additional, correct violations). ChatGPT performed better at legal drafting, and jurors' decisions were not statistically significantly associated with the author of the document upon which they based their decisions. Because GPT-3.5 cannot satisfactorily conduct legal reasoning tasks, it would be unlikely to be able to help lawyers in a meaningful way at this stage. However, ChatGPT's drafting skills (though, perhaps, still inferior to lawyers) could assist lawyers in providing legal services. Our research is the first to systematically study an LLM's legal drafting and reasoning capabilities in litigation, as well as in securities law and cryptocurrency-related misconduct.

cs.AI

Susceptibility to Influence of Large Language Models

Two studies tested the hypothesis that a Large Language Model (LLM) can be used to model psychological change following exposure to influential input. The first study tested a generic mode of influence - the Illusory Truth Effect (ITE) - where earlier exposure to a statement (through, for example, rating its interest) boosts a later truthfulness test rating. Data was collected from 1000 human participants using an online experiment, and 1000 simulated participants using engineered prompts and LLM completion. 64 ratings per participant were collected, using all exposure-test combinations of the attributes: truth, interest, sentiment and importance. The results for human participants reconfirmed the ITE, and demonstrated an absence of effect for attributes other than truth, and when the same attribute is used for exposure and test. The same pattern of effects was found for LLM-simulated participants. The second study concerns a specific mode of influence - populist framing of news to increase its persuasion and political mobilization. Data from LLM-simulated participants was collected and compared to previously published data from a 15-country experiment on 7286 human participants. Several effects previously demonstrated from the human study were replicated by the simulated study, including effects that surprised the authors of the human study by contradicting their theoretical expectations (anti-immigrant framing of news decreases its persuasion and mobilization); but some significant relationships found in human data (modulation of the effectiveness of populist framing according to relative deprivation of the participant) were not present in the LLM data. Together the two studies support the view that LLMs have potential to act as models of the effect of influence.

cs.CL

Of Degens and Defrauders: Using Open-Source Investigative Tools to Investigate Decentralized Finance Frauds and Money Laundering

Fraud across the decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem is growing, with victims losing billions to DeFi scams every year. However, there is a disconnect between the reported value of these scams and associated legal prosecutions. We use open-source investigative tools to (1) investigate potential frauds involving Ethereum tokens using on-chain data and token smart contract analysis, and (2) investigate the ways proceeds from these scams were subsequently laundered. The analysis enabled us to (1) uncover transaction-based evidence of several rug pull and pump-and-dump schemes, and (2) identify their perpetrators' money laundering tactics and cash-out methods. The rug pulls were less sophisticated than anticipated, money laundering techniques were also rudimentary and many funds ended up at centralized exchanges. This study demonstrates how open-source investigative tools can extract transaction-based evidence that could be used in a court of law to prosecute DeFi frauds. Additionally, we investigate how these funds are subsequently laundered.

cs.CR

The RW3D: A multi-modal panel dataset to understand the psychological impact of the pandemic

Besides far-reaching public health consequences, the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant psychological impact on people around the world. To gain further insight into this matter, we introduce the Real World Worry Waves Dataset (RW3D). The dataset combines rich open-ended free-text responses with survey data on emotions, significant life events, and psychological stressors in a repeated-measures design in the UK over three years (2020: n=2441, 2021: n=1716 and 2022: n=1152). This paper provides background information on the data collection procedure, the recorded variables, participants' demographics, and higher-order psychological and text-based derived variables that emerged from the data. The RW3D is a unique primary data resource that could inspire new research questions on the psychological impact of the pandemic, especially those that connect modalities (here: text data, psychological survey variables and demographics) over time.

cs.CL

Testing Human Ability To Detect Deepfake Images of Human Faces

Deepfakes are computationally-created entities that falsely represent reality. They can take image, video, and audio modalities, and pose a threat to many areas of systems and societies, comprising a topic of interest to various aspects of cybersecurity and cybersafety. In 2020 a workshop consulting AI experts from academia, policing, government, the private sector, and state security agencies ranked deepfakes as the most serious AI threat. These experts noted that since fake material can propagate through many uncontrolled routes, changes in citizen behaviour may be the only effective defence. This study aims to assess human ability to identify image deepfakes of human faces (StyleGAN2:FFHQ) from nondeepfake images (FFHQ), and to assess the effectiveness of simple interventions intended to improve detection accuracy. Using an online survey, 280 participants were randomly allocated to one of four groups: a control group, and 3 assistance interventions. Each participant was shown a sequence of 20 images randomly selected from a pool of 50 deepfake and 50 real images of human faces. Participants were asked if each image was AI-generated or not, to report their confidence, and to describe the reasoning behind each response. Overall detection accuracy was only just above chance and none of the interventions significantly improved this. Participants' confidence in their answers was high and unrelated to accuracy. Assessing the results on a per-image basis reveals participants consistently found certain images harder to label correctly, but reported similarly high confidence regardless of the image. Thus, although participant accuracy was 62% overall, this accuracy across images ranged quite evenly between 85% and 30%, with an accuracy of below 50% for one in every five images. We interpret the findings as suggesting that there is a need for an urgent call to action to address this threat.

cs.HC