SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Edoardo Loru

Publications and source records attributed to Edoardo Loru.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

Persistent Structural Inequality of Online Interactions Across Platforms

User interactions on social media platforms are unevenly distributed: a small subset of users consistently captures most of the activity, while the majority remains marginal. Although this pattern is well known and often described by power-law distributions, its consistency across time, platforms, and interaction types has not been systematically assessed. In this study, we analyze user-post bipartite networks from multiple social media platforms. We consider both active contributions (posts) and passive engagement (likes and comments), and quantify distributional properties and inequality using a KL-divergence-based model comparison, an inverse coefficient of variation, and a log-transformed Gini index. Our results show that interaction inequality remains stable over time within each platform. This holds across systems with different sizes, topical focuses, and governance models. These findings indicate that inequality in online engagement is not incidental but reflects structural constraints that shape how visibility and participation are distributed in digital environments.

cs.SI

The Statistical Signature of LLMs

Large language models generate text through probabilistic sampling from high-dimensional distributions, yet how this process reshapes the structural statistical organization of language remains incompletely characterized. Here we show that lossless compression provides a simple, model-agnostic measure of statistical regularity that differentiates generative regimes directly from surface text. We analyze compression behavior across three progressively more complex information ecosystems: controlled human-LLM continuations, generative mediation of a knowledge infrastructure (Wikipedia vs. Grokipedia), and fully synthetic social interaction environments (Moltbook vs. Reddit). Across settings, compression reveals a persistent structural signature of probabilistic generation. In controlled and mediated contexts, LLM-produced language exhibits higher structural regularity and compressibility than human-written text, consistent with a concentration of output within highly recurrent statistical patterns. However, this signature shows scale dependence: in fragmented interaction environments the separation attenuates, suggesting a fundamental limit to surface-level distinguishability at small scales. This compressibility-based separation emerges consistently across models, tasks, and domains and can be observed directly from surface text without relying on model internals or semantic evaluation. Overall, our findings introduce a simple and robust framework for quantifying how generative systems reshape textual production, offering a structural perspective on the evolving complexity of communication.

cs.CL

Hyperactive Minority Alters the Stability of Community Notes

As platforms increasingly scale down professional fact-checking, community-based alternatives are promoted as more transparent and democratic. The main substitute being proposed is community-based contextualization, most notably Community Notes on X, where users write annotations and collectively rate their helpfulness under a consensus-oriented algorithm. This shift raises a basic empirical question: to what extent do users' social dynamics affect the emergence of Community Notes? We address this question by characterizing participation and political behavior, using the full public release of notes and ratings (between 2021 and 2025). We show that contribution activity is highly concentrated: a small minority of users accounts for a disproportionate share of ratings. Crucially, these high-activity contributors are not neutral volunteers: they are selective in the content they engage with and substantially more politically polarized than the overall contributor population. We replicate the notes' emergence process by integrating the open-source implementation of the Community Notes consensus algorithm used in production. This enables us to conduct counterfactual simulations that modify the display status of notes by varying the pool of raters. Our results reveal that the system is structurally unstable: the emergence and visibility of notes often depend on the behavior of a few dozen highly active users, and even minor perturbations in their participation can lead to markedly different outcomes. In sum, rather than decentralizing epistemic authority, community-based fact-checking on X reconfigures it, concentrating substantial power in the hands of a small, polarized group of highly active contributors.

cs.SI

Wikipedia and Grokipedia: A Comparison of Human and Generative Encyclopedias

We present a comparative analysis of Wikipedia and Grokipedia to examine how generative mediation alters content selection, textual rewriting, narrative structure, and evaluative framing in encyclopedic content. We model page inclusion in Grokipedia as a function of Wikipedia page popularity, density of reference, and recent editorial activity. Inclusion is non-uniform: pages with higher visibility and greater editorial conflict in Wikipedia are more likely to appear in Grokipedia. For included pages, we distinguish between verbatim reproduction and generative rewriting. Rewriting is more frequent for pages with higher reference density and recent controversy, while highly popular pages are more often reproduced without modification. We compare editing activity across the two platforms and estimate page complexity using a fitness-complexity framework to assess whether generative mediation alters patterns of editorial participation. To assess narrative organization, we construct actor-relation networks from article texts using abstract meaning representation. Across multiple topical domains, including U.S. politics, geopolitics, and conspiracy-related narratives, narrative structure remains largely consistent between the two sources. Analysis of lead sections shows broadly correlated framing, with localized shifts in laudatory and conflict-oriented language for some topics in Grokipedia. Overall, generative systems preserve the main structural organization of encyclopedic content, while affecting how content is selected, rewritten, and framed.

cs.CY

Patterns, Models, and Challenges in Online Social Media: A Survey

The rise of digital platforms has enabled the large scale observation of individual and collective behavior through high resolution interaction data. This development has opened new analytical pathways for investigating how information circulates, how opinions evolve, and how coordination emerges in online environments. Yet despite a growing body of research, the field remains fragmented and marked by methodological heterogeneity, limited model validation, and weak integration across domains. This survey offers a systematic synthesis of empirical findings and formal models. We examine platform-level regularities, assess the methodological architectures that generate them, and evaluate the extent to which current modeling frameworks account for observed dynamics. The goal is to consolidate a shared empirical baseline and clarify the structural constraints that shape inference in this domain, laying the groundwork for more robust, comparable, and actionable analyses of online social systems.

cs.SI

Generative Exaggeration in LLM Social Agents: Consistency, Bias, and Toxicity

We investigate how Large Language Models (LLMs) behave when simulating political discourse on social media. Leveraging 21 million interactions on X during the 2024 U.S. presidential election, we construct LLM agents based on 1,186 real users, prompting them to reply to politically salient tweets under controlled conditions. Agents are initialized either with minimal ideological cues (Zero Shot) or recent tweet history (Few Shot), allowing one-to-one comparisons with human replies. We evaluate three model families (Gemini, Mistral, and DeepSeek) across linguistic style, ideological consistency, and toxicity. We find that richer contextualization improves internal consistency but also amplifies polarization, stylized signals, and harmful language. We observe an emergent distortion that we call "generation exaggeration": a systematic amplification of salient traits beyond empirical baselines. Our analysis shows that LLMs do not emulate users, they reconstruct them. Their outputs, indeed, reflect internal optimization dynamics more than observed behavior, introducing structural biases that compromise their reliability as social proxies. This challenges their use in content moderation, deliberative simulations, and policy modeling.

cs.HC

The simulation of judgment in LLMs

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in evaluative processes, from information filtering to assessing and addressing knowledge gaps through explanation and credibility judgments. This raises the need to examine how such evaluations are built, what assumptions they rely on, and how their strategies diverge from those of humans. We benchmark six LLMs against expert ratings--NewsGuard and Media Bias/Fact Check--and against human judgments collected through a controlled experiment. We use news domains purely as a controlled benchmark for evaluative tasks, focusing on the underlying mechanisms rather than on news classification per se. To enable direct comparison, we implement a structured agentic framework in which both models and nonexpert participants follow the same evaluation procedure: selecting criteria, retrieving content, and producing justifications. Despite output alignment, our findings show consistent differences in the observable criteria guiding model evaluations, suggesting that lexical associations and statistical priors could influence evaluations in ways that differ from contextual reasoning. This reliance is associated with systematic effects: political asymmetries and a tendency to confuse linguistic form with epistemic reliability--a dynamic we term epistemia, the illusion of knowledge that emerges when surface plausibility replaces verification. Indeed, delegating judgment to such systems may affect the heuristics underlying evaluative processes, suggesting a shift from normative reasoning toward pattern-based approximation and raising open questions about the role of LLMs in evaluative processes.

cs.CL

Modelling infodemics on a global scale: A 30 countries study using epidemiological and social listening data

Infodemics represent a significant threat to public health, arising from complex interactions between online and offline phenomena. The continuous feedback loops between digital information ecosystems and real-world contingencies make infodemics particularly challenging to define operationally, measure, and eventually model in quantitative terms. This study aims to evaluate the effect of various epidemic-related variables on the dynamics of the COVID-19 infodemic, using a regression modeling framework applied to data from 30 countries across diverse income groups. We use World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 surveillance data on new cases and deaths, vaccination data from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, infodemic data (volume of public conversations and social media content) from the WHO EARS platform, and Google Trends data to represent information demand. Our findings show that new deaths are the strongest predictor of document production, and that the epidemic burden in neighboring countries exerts a greater influence on document production than domestic epidemic conditions. Building on these results, we propose a data-driven classification of country-level response that highlights country-specific discrepancies between the evolution of the infodemic and the epidemic. Further, an analysis of the temporal evolution of the relationship between the two phenomena quantifies the extent to which discussions surrounding vaccine rollouts may have shaped the development of the infodemic. Beyond underscoring the value of a holistic approach that integrates both online and offline dimensions, our results demonstrate that the evolution of infodemics and their relationship with epidemic variables can be closely monitored, even over short time windows.

cs.SI

Decoding Musical Evolution Through Network Science

Music has always been central to human culture, reflecting and shaping traditions, emotions, and societal changes. Technological advancements have transformed how music is created and consumed, influencing tastes and the music itself. In this study, we use Network Science to analyze musical complexity. Drawing on $\approx20,000$ MIDI files across six macro-genres spanning nearly four centuries, we represent each composition as a weighted directed network to study its structural properties. Our results show that Classical and Jazz compositions have higher complexity and melodic diversity than recently developed genres. However, a temporal analysis reveals a trend toward simplification, with even Classical and Jazz nearing the complexity levels of modern genres. This study highlights how digital tools and streaming platforms shape musical evolution, fostering new genres while driving homogenization and simplicity.

cs.SD

Ideology and polarization set the agenda on social media

The abundance of information on social media has reshaped public discussions, shifting attention to the mechanisms that drive online discourse. This study analyzes large-scale Twitter (now X) data from three global debates--Climate Change, COVID-19, and the Russo-Ukrainian War--to investigate the structural dynamics of engagement. Our findings reveal that discussions are not primarily shaped by specific categories of actors, such as media or activists, but by shared ideological alignment. Users consistently form polarized communities, where their ideological stance in one debate predicts their positions in others. This polarization transcends individual topics, reflecting a broader pattern of ideological divides. Furthermore, the influence of individual actors within these communities appears secondary to the reinforcing effects of selective exposure and shared narratives. Overall, our results underscore that ideological alignment, rather than actor prominence, plays a central role in structuring online discourse and shaping the spread of information in polarized environments.

cs.SI

The Evolution of Language in Social Media Comments

Understanding the impact of digital platforms on user behavior presents foundational challenges, including issues related to polarization, misinformation dynamics, and variation in news consumption. Comparative analyses across platforms and over different years can provide critical insights into these phenomena. This study investigates the linguistic characteristics of user comments over 34 years, focusing on their complexity and temporal shifts. Utilizing a dataset of approximately 300 million English comments from eight diverse platforms and topics, we examine the vocabulary size and linguistic richness of user communications and their evolution over time. Our findings reveal consistent patterns of complexity across social media platforms and topics, characterized by a nearly universal reduction in text length, diminished lexical richness, but decreased repetitiveness. Despite these trends, users consistently introduce new words into their comments at a nearly constant rate. This analysis underscores that platforms only partially influence the complexity of user comments. Instead, it reflects a broader, universal pattern of human behaviour, suggesting intrinsic linguistic tendencies of users when interacting online.

physics.soc-ph

The influence of coordinated behavior on toxicity

In the intricate landscape of social media, genuine content dissemination may be altered by a number of threats. Coordinated Behavior (CB), defined as orchestrated efforts by entities to deceive or mislead users about their identity and intentions, emerges as a tactic to exploit or manipulate online discourse. This study delves into the relationship between CB and toxic conversation on X (formerly known as Twitter). Using a dataset of 11 million tweets from 1 million users preceding the 2019 UK general election, we show that users displaying CB typically disseminate less harmful content, irrespective of political affiliation. However, distinct toxicity patterns emerge among different coordinated cohorts. Compared to their non-CB counterparts, CB participants show marginally higher toxicity levels only when considering their original posts. We further show the effects of CB-driven toxic content on non-CB users, gauging its impact based on political leanings. Our findings suggest that CB only has a limited impact on the toxicity of digital discourse.

cs.SI