arXiv subjects

Hazem Ibrahim

Publications and source records attributed to Hazem Ibrahim.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Chance, Persistent Advantage, and the Generative-AI Era in Open-Source Package Careers

Studies of careers in science, film, music, and books report a common pattern. When a person's most successful work arrives is close to a random draw over the works they produce. How large their successes tend to be, in contrast, follows a stable, person-specific factor. We test whether this pattern holds for open-source software careers and whether it changed when generative AI coding tools arrived. From the complete public record of GitHub push events (2015-2025), we reconstruct 102.2M career works by 6.15M contributors, and for the 908k contributors whose repositories publish packages, we measure each work's impact by how many downstream packages come to depend on it. First, we find that the timing of a career's biggest hit is close to a lottery over their works, as in science and the arts, with a small, replicable lean toward early career that grows as careers get longer. Second, some coders reliably produce higher-impact work than others, but this lasting personal factor accounts for only part of why impact persists (about a fifth in our primary specification); the rest behaves like momentum, success feeding on itself for a period of time. Third, within the same contributors, this structure did not change after ChatGPT's release. The stable factor's weight grew by about as much as it grew for an earlier cohort that simply aged, and subtracting the effect of aging from the effect of generative AI puts the shift at +0.03 (95% CI [-0.22, +0.23]), indistinguishable from zero. The success pattern documented in science and the arts therefore describes open-source careers too, and it shows no detectable break across the arrival of generative AI. These results have implications for how track records on open platforms should be read and on what to expect from generative AI for the careers built on them.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Price Dislocations, News Citations, and Epistemic Leverage on Polymarket

Prediction-market probabilities increasingly appear in news coverage, yet little is known about which market movements become news or how much trading money sits behind the numbers journalists quote. Unlike a poll, a market price can be moved by anyone willing to trade, so the cost of manufacturing a number that circulates as news bears directly on the information environment. We link 173.7 million signed Polymarket trades to news coverage from 2024-2025. From 6,990 articles mentioning prediction-market venues, an LLM-based, human-validated matcher extracts 1,582 sentences quoting market odds and attributes 918 to the specific market whose price they cite. We then detect 44,976 price dislocations, movements of at least five percentage points backed by concentrated one-sided trading, and ask whether a market is cited more often afterward. In the days after a dislocation, a market's citation rate is about 33% higher than its matched baseline (log citation-rate ratio $\tau_{\mathrm{cite}}=0.283$, permutation $p=0.001$), robust to binary and Poisson count outcomes. Yet move size is not the strongest predictor of citation: prominence dominates (standardized $\beta=0.610$ vs. $\beta=0.159$ for move size). Finally, we combine the dollar flow behind a given price change with observed citation rates into a metric we call epistemic leverage, the dollars needed to move a market five points and have the move cited. It stays near \$0.7-1.0 million across prominence quintiles, because cheaper-to-move markets are proportionally less likely to be cited. The implied threat model centers not on the long tail of cheaply moved markets but on the few prominent markets newsrooms treat as informational infrastructure, where a seven-figure price of influence sits within the budgets of actors with a large stake in the quoted number. We release aggregate event-study data and validation materials.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Bias at the Borderline: Who Gets the Benefit of the Doubt in Peer Review?

We study peer review at ICLR, a large machine-learning conference whose complete review record, including rejected submissions, is public. Reviewers score each submission; for the borderline band whose scores do not settle an outcome, an area chair makes a discretionary accept-or-reject call. We ask whether that call is even-handed: do authors from prestigious institutions, WEIRD countries, or all-male teams get the benefit of the doubt at the margin? Across ICLR 2019-2025 (31,711 submissions; 10,416 borderline), borderline papers without a top-25-institution author are accepted at a 0.5 to 1.6 percentage point lower rate at the same reviewer scores. The gap arises at the discretionary stage, reappears out-of-sample in the pre-registered ICLR 2026 cohort, and concentrates almost entirely among submissions identifiable through a pre-decision arXiv preprint (-3.4 vs. -0.2 points). Equal scores need not mean equal papers: an area chair may respond to quality the scores miss. We apply a robust outcome test, which concludes discrimination only when the group accepted at a lower rate also realizes better downstream outcomes. We measure five outcomes (citations, disruption, two forms of novelty, eventual venue) on both sides of the decision, including the first "ones that got away" test of rejected submissions. Our headline result is a null: across a pre-registered family of 27 tests, no disparity concordant with the decision-rate gap survives correction; we find no evidence that any group faced a higher bar on the outcomes we measure. That null is not an exoneration. A pre-decision preprint pierces the blind through policy-permitted means, and the acceptance gap lives almost entirely in that porosity, consistent with area chairs using revealed institutional prestige as a prior: statistical discrimination that outcome tests may not detect, and a practice double-blind review exists to prevent.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

On-Screen Inertia: Persistent Racial and Gender Disparities in Hollywood Film (1900-2024)

Hollywood has diversified its casts. Whether this has translated into structural change in how those actors are positioned within narratives remains largely unexamined. Drawing on 76,815 U.S. English-language films (1900-2024) and over 3.1 million cast and crew entries, we move beyond headcounts to examine long-term inclusion trends through network centrality, occupational stereotypes, crew-to-cast diversity pathways, and financial outcomes. We find evidence of what we term on-screen inertia. While the raw inclusion of women and racial minorities has increased modestly, White actors have become more overrepresented relative to the U.S. Census in recent decades, not less. Within the visibility layer, women face a consistent longevity penalty with significantly shorter careers than men, and visual depictions framing men as dominant and women as sensual have remained stable since the 1950s. Structurally, White actors retain disproportionate network centrality; women achieve parity in centrality and lead billing yet cluster in secondary co-lead roles; and occupational stereotypes anchoring racial and gender groups to specific labor categories persist largely unchanged across the pre- and post-2000 periods. Crew diversity associates with cast inclusion only along matching demographic lines (i.e., racial with racial, gender with gender) and does not extend to narrative centrality, revealing a structural ceiling on hiring-based interventions. Critically, we find no consistent market penalty for diversity across decades of box office returns and audience ratings, eliminating the primary rationalization for these practices. Together, these findings demonstrate that Hollywood's representational inequalities are not a rational market response, but are an institutionally sustained choice.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Auditing Differential Visibility of Political Content on TikTok

Allegations that TikTok shadow bans political content shape what creators post, what advertisers fund, and how regulators act, yet they are hard to adjudicate because platforms do not disclose how content is ranked. We test the claim with a dense hourly panel of 556,946 follower-normalized views across 2,753 videos from 67 accounts curated into pro and anti sides of three contested topics (U.S. immigration enforcement, Trump coverage, and Israel/Palestine). On-topic videos are identified by a multi-step classifier, and stance is taken from each account's curated side. The conventional analysis appears to answer yes. Pooling the hourly snapshots, the topic-conditional reach gap reaches p < 10^-140. Analyzed at the account level, the independent unit at which we sample and assign stance, the gap disappears. Every account-level reach contrast is null after correction (BH-FDR q near 0.9). We find no evidence of moderate-to-large reach suppression on any topic. The null is informative. Account-level confidence intervals and a power analysis rule out such effects. As a design check, the same framework detects a clear asymmetry on a different outcome. Oppositional content (anti-Trump, pro-Palestine) earns more engagement per view rather than less reach (Cliff's delta = -0.51 and -0.64; q < 0.03). Higher engagement does not by itself rule out suppression, but shows the design can detect effects of this magnitude. The apparent reach gap is an artifact of two factors. The first is pseudoreplication, which counts tens of thousands of autocorrelated video-hours as independent observations; the second is confounding, since the side that looks suppressed is larger and, on Israel/Palestine, posts mostly in Arabic. In this corpus, what is taken for a shadow ban is better explained by a more engaged audience than by a suppressed one. We close with what a credible visibility audit requires.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Schadenfreude in the Digital Public Sphere: A cross-national and decade-long analysis of Facebook news engagement

Schadenfreude, or the pleasure derived from others' misfortunes, has become a visible and performative feature of online news engagement, yet little is known about its prevalence, dynamics, or social patterning. We examine schadenfreude on Facebook over a ten-year period across nine major news publishers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and India (one left-leaning, one right-leaning, and one centrist per country). Using a combination of human annotation and machine-learning classification, we identify posts describing misfortune and detect schadenfreude in nearly one million associated comments. We find that while sadness and anger dominate reactions to misfortune posts, laughter and amusement form a substantial and patterned minority. Schadenfreude is most frequent in moralized and political contexts, higher among right-leaning audiences, and more pronounced in India than in the United States or United Kingdom. Temporal and regression analyses further reveal asymmetric relationships between political power and schadenfreude: left-leaning outlets display "power-licensed" schadenfreude that increases when their party governs, while right-leaning outlets exhibit "power-compensatory" schadenfreude that intensifies in opposition. Together, our findings move beyond anecdotal accounts to map schadenfreude as a dynamic, context-dependent feature of digital discourse, revealing how it evolves over time and across ideological and cultural divides.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Computation-Accuracy Trade-Off in Service-Oriented Model-Based Control

Representing a control system as a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)-referred to as Service-Oriented Model-Based Control (SOMC)-enables runtime-flexible composition of control loop elements. This paper presents a framework that optimizes the computation-accuracy trade-off by formulating service orchestration as an A$^\star$search problem, complemented by Contextual Bayesian Optimization (BO) to tune the multi-objective cost weights. A vehicle longitudinal-velocity control case study demonstrates online, performancedriven reconfiguration of the control architecture. We show that our framework not only combines control and software structure but also considers the real-time requirements of the control system during performance optimization.

eess.SY↗

arXiv2025

Causal evidence of racial and institutional biases in accessing paywalled articles and scientific data

Scientific progress depends on researchers' ability to access and build upon the work of others. Yet, much published work remains behind expensive paywalls, and even accessible articles often rest on datasets shared only "upon reasonable request" to the authors. Researchers can try to overcome these barriers through informal channels, such as emailing authors directly, but whether such channels are hindered by racial or institutional biases remains unknown. Here we combine survey data, semi-structured interviews, large-scale observational analysis, and two randomized audit experiments to examine disparities in access to scientific knowledge. Surveyed researchers in the Global South report markedly lower institutional access to the literature and depend more heavily on informal channels to obtain papers and data; interviews elaborate the workarounds and racialized frictions they encounter. Our analysis of 250 million articles reveals that Global South researchers cite paywalled papers at significantly lower rates than Global North counterparts--a gap associated with reduced knowledge breadth and scholarly impact. Using citation-context classification, we further find that papers whose data is available only upon request are less likely to be cited for reusing their data, a penalty falling disproportionately on the Global South. To probe mechanisms, we conduct two email audit studies in which fictional PhD students differing in racial background and institutional affiliation request paywalled articles (N = 18,000) and datasets (N = 16,000). Racial identity influences response rates to both requests, whereas institutional affiliation influences access to datasets. These findings reveal how informal gatekeeping can perpetuate structural inequities in science, highlighting the need for stronger data-sharing mandates and more equitable open-access policies.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2025

Who Gets Seen in the Age of AI? Adoption Patterns of Large Language Models in Scholarly Writing and Citation Outcomes

The rapid adoption of generative AI tools is reshaping how scholars produce and communicate knowledge, raising questions about who benefits and who is left behind. We analyze over 230,000 Scopus-indexed computer science articles between 2021 and 2025 to examine how AI-assisted writing alters scholarly visibility across regions. Using zero-shot detection of AI-likeness, we track stylistic changes in writing and link them to citation counts, journal placement, and global citation flows before and after ChatGPT. Our findings reveal uneven outcomes: authors in the Global East adopt AI tools more aggressively, yet Western authors gain more per unit of adoption due to pre-existing penalties for "humanlike" writing. Prestigious journals continue to privilege more human-sounding texts, creating tensions between visibility and gatekeeping. Network analyses show modest increases in Eastern visibility and tighter intra-regional clustering, but little structural integration overall. These results highlight how AI adoption reconfigures the labor of academic writing and reshapes opportunities for recognition.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Political Ideology of Large Language Models: Measurement, Inconsistency, and Persuasive Influence

Large Language Models (LLMs) are a transformational technology, fundamentally changing how people obtain information and interact with the world. As people become increasingly reliant on them for an enormous variety of tasks, a body of academic research has developed to examine these models for inherent biases, especially political biases, often finding them small. We challenge this prevailing wisdom. First, by comparing 43 LLMs to legislators, judges, and a nationally representative sample of U.S. voters, we show that LLMs' apparently moderate overall partisan positioning is the net result of offsetting strongly partisan expressed positions on specific topics, much like moderate voters. Second, in a pre-registered randomized experiment, we show that LLMs can exert persuasive influence on political attitudes. Voters randomized to discuss a policy issue with an LLM shift toward that model's measured ideological position by 3.5 percentage points on average, an effect at least as large as those produced by professional campaign advertising. Explicitly prompting a model to argue one side of the issue shifts attitudes by more than 10 percentage points relative to unsteered conversations, and this steering accounts for the pooled effect. When the same models converse naturally, without steering, we detect no persuasive effect, and our confidence interval rules out effects as small as the pre-registered smallest effect of interest. Contrary to expectations, these persuasive effects are not moderated by familiarity with LLMs, news consumption, or interest in politics. LLMs, especially those controlled by private companies or governments, may become a powerful and targeted vector for political influence.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Simulation to Reality: Testbeds and Architectures for Connected and Automated Vehicles

Ensuring the safe and efficient operation of CAVs relies heavily on the software framework used. A software framework needs to ensure real-time properties, reliable communication, and efficient resource utilization. Furthermore, a software framework needs to enable seamless transition between testing stages, from simulation to small-scale to full-scale experiments. In this paper, we survey prominent software frameworks used for in-vehicle and inter-vehicle communication in CAVs. We analyze these frameworks regarding opportunities and challenges, such as their real-time properties and transitioning capabilities. Additionally, we delve into the tooling requirements necessary for addressing the associated challenges. We illustrate the practical implications of these challenges through case studies focusing on critical areas such as perception, motion planning, and control. Furthermore, we identify research gaps in the field, highlighting areas where further investigation is needed to advance the development and deployment of safe and efficient CAV systems.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2025

Neutralizing the Narrative: AI-Powered Debiasing of Online News Articles

Bias in news reporting significantly impacts public perception, particularly regarding crime, politics, and societal issues. Traditional bias detection methods, predominantly reliant on human moderation, suffer from subjective interpretations and scalability constraints. Here, we introduce an AI-driven framework leveraging advanced large language models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini, Gemini Pro, Gemini Flash, Llama 8B, and Llama 3B, to systematically identify and mitigate biases in news articles. To this end, we collect an extensive dataset consisting of over 30,000 crime-related articles from five politically diverse news sources spanning a decade (2013-2023). Our approach employs a two-stage methodology: (1) bias detection, where each LLM scores and justifies biased content at the paragraph level, validated through human evaluation for ground truth establishment, and (2) iterative debiasing using GPT-4o Mini, verified by both automated reassessment and human reviewers. Empirical results indicate GPT-4o Mini's superior accuracy in bias detection and effectiveness in debiasing. Furthermore, our analysis reveals temporal and geographical variations in media bias correlating with socio-political dynamics and real-world events. This study contributes to scalable computational methodologies for bias mitigation, promoting fairness and accountability in news reporting.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

A Tale of Three Location Trackers: AirTag, SmartTag, and Tile

Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) location trackers, or "tags", are popular consumer devices for monitoring personal items. These tags rely on their respective network of companion devices that are capable of detecting their BLE signals and relay location information back to the owner. While manufacturers claim that such crowd-sourced approach yields accurate location tracking, the tags' real-world performance characteristics remain insufficiently understood. To this end, this study presents a comprehensive analysis of three major players in the market: Apple's AirTag, Samsung's SmartTag, and Tile. Our methodology combines controlled experiments -- with a known large distribution of location-reporting devices -- as well as in-the-wild experiments -- with no control on the number and kind of reporting devices encountered, thus emulating real-life use-cases. Leveraging data collection techniques improved from prior research, we recruit 22 volunteers traveling across 29 countries, examining the tags' performance under various environments and conditions. Our findings highlight crucial updates in device behavior since previous studies, with AirTag showing marked improvements in location report frequency. Companion device density emerged as the primary determinant of tag performance, overshadowing technological differences between products. Additionally, we find that post-COVID-19 mobility trends could have contributed to enhanced performance for AirTag and SmartTag. Tile, despite its cross-platform compatibility, exhibited notably lower accuracy, particularly in Asia and Africa, due to limited global adoption. Statistical modeling of spatial errors -- measured as the distance between reported and actual tag locations -- shows log-normal distributions across all tags, highlighting the need for improved location estimation methods to reduce occasional significant inaccuracies.

cs.PF↗

arXiv2025

TikTok's recommendations skewed towards Republican content during the 2024 U.S. presidential race

TikTok is a major force among social media platforms with over a billion monthly active users worldwide and 170 million in the United States. The platform's status as a key news source, particularly among younger demographics, raises concerns about its potential influence on politics in the U.S. and globally. Despite these concerns, there is scant research investigating TikTok's recommendation algorithm for political biases. We fill this gap by conducting 323 independent algorithmic audit experiments testing partisan content recommendations in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential elections. Specifically, we create hundreds of "sock puppet" TikTok accounts in Texas, New York, and Georgia, seeding them with varying partisan content and collecting algorithmic content recommendations for each of them. Collectively, these accounts viewed ~394,000 videos from April 30th to November 11th, 2024, which we label for political and partisan content. Our analysis reveals significant asymmetries in content distribution: Republican-seeded accounts received ~11.8% more party-aligned recommendations compared to their Democratic-seeded counterparts, and Democratic-seeded accounts were exposed to ~7.5% more opposite-party recommendations on average. These asymmetries exist across all three states and persist when accounting for video- and channel-level engagement metrics such as likes, views, shares, comments, and followers, and are driven primarily by negative partisanship content. Our findings provide insights into the inner workings of TikTok's recommendation algorithm during a critical election period, raising fundamental questions about platform neutrality.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2024

Analyzing political stances on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. election

Social media platforms play a pivotal role in shaping public opinion and amplifying political discourse, particularly during elections. However, the same dynamics that foster democratic engagement can also exacerbate polarization. To better understand these challenges, here, we investigate the ideological positioning of tweets related to the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election. To this end, we analyze 1,235 tweets from key political figures and 63,322 replies, and classify ideological stances into Pro-Democrat, Anti-Republican, Pro-Republican, Anti-Democrat, and Neutral categories. Using a classification pipeline involving three large language models (LLMs)-GPT-4o, Gemini-Pro, and Claude-Opus-and validated by human annotators, we explore how ideological alignment varies between candidates and constituents. We find that Republican candidates author significantly more tweets in criticism of the Democratic party and its candidates than vice versa, but this relationship does not hold for replies to candidate tweets. Furthermore, we highlight shifts in public discourse observed during key political events. By shedding light on the ideological dynamics of online political interactions, these results provide insights for policymakers and platforms seeking to address polarization and foster healthier political dialogue.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2024

Graph-Based Orchestration of Service-Oriented Model-Based Control Systems

This paper presents a novel graph-based method for adapting control system architectures at runtime. We use a service-oriented architecture as a basis for its formulation. In our method, adaptation is achieved by selecting the most suitable elements, such as filters and controllers, for a control system architecture to improve control systems objective based on a predefined cost function. Traditional configuration methods, such as state machines, lack flexibility and depend on a predefined control system architecture during runtime. Our graph-based method allows for dynamic changes in the control system architecture, as well as a change in its objective depending on the given system state. Our approach uses a weighted, directed graph to model the control system elements and their interaction. In a case-study with a three-tank system, we show that by using our graph-based method for architecture adaptation, the control system is more flexible, has lower computation time, and higher accuracy than traditional configuration methods.

eess.SY↗

arXiv2024

A Longitudinal Analysis of Racial and Gender Bias in New York Times and Fox News Images and Articles

The manner in which different racial and gender groups are portrayed in news coverage plays a large role in shaping public opinion. As such, understanding how such groups are portrayed in news media is of notable societal value, and has thus been a significant endeavour in both the computer and social sciences. Yet, the literature still lacks a longitudinal study examining both the frequency of appearance of different racial and gender groups in online news articles, as well as the context in which such groups are discussed. To fill this gap, we propose two machine learning classifiers to detect the race and age of a given subject. Next, we compile a dataset of 123,337 images and 441,321 online news articles from New York Times (NYT) and Fox News (Fox), and examine representation through two computational approaches. Firstly, we examine the frequency and prominence of appearance of racial and gender groups in images embedded in news articles, revealing that racial and gender minorities are largely under-represented, and when they do appear, they are featured less prominently compared to majority groups. Furthermore, we find that NYT largely features more images of racial minority groups compared to Fox. Secondly, we examine both the frequency and context with which racial minority groups are presented in article text. This reveals the narrow scope in which certain racial groups are covered and the frequency with which different groups are presented as victims and/or perpetrators in a given conflict. Taken together, our analysis contributes to the literature by providing two novel open-source classifiers to detect race and age from images, and shedding light on the racial and gender biases in news articles from venues on opposite ends of the American political spectrum.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Inclusive content reduces racial and gender biases, yet non-inclusive content dominates popular culture

Images are often termed as representations of perceived reality. As such, racial and gender biases in popular culture and visual media could play a critical role in shaping people's perceptions of society. While previous research has made significant progress in exploring the frequency and discrepancies in racial and gender group appearances in visual media, it has largely overlooked important nuances in how these groups are portrayed, as it lacked the ability to systematically capture such complexities at scale over time. To address this gap, we examine two media forms of varying target audiences, namely fashion magazines and movie posters. Accordingly, we collect a large dataset comprising over 300,000 images spanning over five decades and utilize state-of-the-art machine learning models to classify not only race and gender but also the posture, expressed emotional state, and body composition of individuals featured in each image. We find that racial minorities appear far less frequently than their White counterparts, and when they do appear, they are portrayed less prominently. We also find that women are more likely to be portrayed with their full bodies, whereas men are more frequently presented with their faces. Finally, through a series of survey experiments, we find evidence that exposure to inclusive content can help reduce biases in perceptions of minorities, while racially and gender-homogenized content may reinforce and amplify such biases. Taken together, our findings highlight that racial and gender biases in visual media remain pervasive, potentially exacerbating existing stereotypes and inequalities.

cs.CY↗