Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Rada Mihalcea

Publications and source records attributed to Rada Mihalcea.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Preserving Historical Truth: Detecting Historical Revisionism in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as sources of historical information, motivating the need for scalable audits on contested events and politically charged narratives in settings that mirror real user interactions. We introduce \texttt{HistoricalMisinfo, a curated dataset of $500$ contested events from $45$ countries, each paired with a factual reference narrative and a documented revisionist reference narrative. To approximate real-world usage, we instantiate each event in $11$ prompt scenarios that reflect common communication settings (e.g., questions, textbooks, social posts, policy briefs). Using an LLM-as-a-judge protocol that compares model outputs to the two references, we evaluate LLMs varying across model architectures in two conditions: (i) neutral user prompts that ask for factually accurate information, and (ii) robustness prompts in which the user explicitly requests the revisionist version of the event. Under neutral prompts, models are generally closer to factual references, though the resulting scores should be interpreted as reference-alignment signals rather than definitive evidence of human-interpretable revisionism. Robustness prompting yields a strong and consistent effect: when the user requests the revisionist narrative, all evaluated models show sharply higher revisionism scores, indicating limited resistance or self-correction. HistoricalMisinfo provides a practical foundation for benchmarking robustness to revisionist framing and for guiding future work on more precise automatic evaluation of contested historical claims to ensure a sustainable integration of AI systems within society. Our code is available at https://github.com/francescortu/PreservingHistoricalTruth

cs.CY↗

Copyright Detective: A Forensic System to Evidence LLMs Flickering Copyright Leakage Risks

We present Copyright Detective, the first interactive forensic system for detecting, analyzing, and visualizing potential copyright risks in LLM outputs. The system treats copyright infringement versus compliance as an evidence discovery process rather than a static classification task due to the complex nature of copyright law. It integrates multiple detection paradigms, including content recall testing, paraphrase-level similarity analysis, persuasive jailbreak probing, and unlearning verification, within a unified and extensible framework. Through interactive prompting, response collection, and iterative workflows, our system enables systematic auditing of verbatim memorization and paraphrase-level leakage, supporting responsible deployment and transparent evaluation of LLM copyright risks even with black-box access.

cs.CL↗

NLP for Social Good: A Survey and Outlook of Challenges, Opportunities, and Responsible Deployment

Natural language processing (NLP) now shapes many aspects of our world, yet its potential for positive social impact is underexplored. This paper surveys work in ``NLP for Social Good" (NLP4SG) across nine domains relevant to global development and risk agendas, summarizing principal tasks and challenges. We analyze ACL Anthology trends, finding that inclusion and AI harms attract the most research, while domains such as poverty, peacebuilding, and environmental protection remain underexplored. Guided by our review, we outline opportunities for responsible and equitable NLP and conclude with a call for cross-disciplinary partnerships and human-centered approaches to ensure that future NLP technologies advance the public good.

cs.CL↗

Democratic or Authoritarian? Probing a New Dimension of Political Biases in Large Language Models

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become increasingly integrated into everyday life and information ecosystems, concerns about their implicit biases continue to persist. While prior work has primarily examined socio-demographic and left--right political dimensions, little attention has been paid to how LLMs align with broader geopolitical value systems, particularly the democracy--authoritarianism spectrum. In this paper, we propose a novel methodology to assess such alignment, combining (1) the F-scale, a psychometric tool for measuring authoritarian tendencies, (2) FavScore, a newly introduced metric for evaluating model favorability toward world leaders, and (3) role-model probing to assess which figures are cited as general role-models by LLMs. We find that LLMs generally favor democratic values and leaders, but exhibit increased favorability toward authoritarian figures when prompted in Mandarin. Further, models are found to often cite authoritarian figures as role models, even outside explicit political contexts. These results shed light on ways LLMs may reflect and potentially reinforce global political ideologies, highlighting the importance of evaluating bias beyond conventional socio-political axes. Our code is available at: https://github.com/irenestrauss/Democratic-Authoritarian-Bias-LLMs.

cs.CL↗

Culture Affordance Atlas: Reconciling Object Diversity Through Functional Mapping

Culture shapes the objects people use and for what purposes, yet mainstream Vision-Language (VL) datasets frequently exhibit cultural biases, disproportionately favoring higher-income, Western contexts. This imbalance reduces model generalizability and perpetuates performance disparities, especially impacting lower-income and non-Western communities. To address these disparities, we propose a novel function-centric framework that categorizes objects by the functions they fulfill, across diverse cultural and economic contexts. We implement this framework by creating the Culture Affordance Atlas, a re-annotated and culturally grounded restructuring of the Dollar Street dataset spanning 46 functions and 288 objects publicly available at https://lit.eecs.umich.edu/CultureAffordance-Atlas/index.html. Through extensive empirical analyses using the CLIP model, we demonstrate that function-centric labels substantially reduce socioeconomic performance gaps between high- and low-income groups by a median of 6 pp (statistically significant), improving model effectiveness for lower-income contexts. Furthermore, our analyses reveals numerous culturally essential objects that are frequently overlooked in prominent VL datasets. Our contributions offer a scalable pathway toward building inclusive VL datasets and equitable AI systems.

cs.CY↗

Human Decision-making is Susceptible to AI-driven Manipulation

AI systems are increasingly intertwined with daily life, assisting users with various tasks and guiding decision-making. This integration introduces risks of AI-driven manipulation, where such systems may exploit users' cognitive biases and emotional vulnerabilities to steer them toward harmful outcomes. Through a randomized between-subjects experiment with 233 participants, we examined human susceptibility to such manipulation in financial (e.g., purchases) and emotional (e.g., conflict resolution) decision-making contexts. Participants interacted with one of three AI agents: a neutral agent (NA) optimizing for user benefit without explicit influence, a manipulative agent (MA) designed to covertly influence beliefs and behaviors, or a strategy-enhanced manipulative agent (SEMA) equipped with established psychological tactics, allowing it to select and apply them adaptively during interactions to reach its hidden objectives. By analyzing participants' preference ratings, we found significant susceptibility to AI-driven manipulation. Particularly across both decision-making domains, interacting with the manipulative agents significantly increased the odds of rating hidden incentives higher than optimal options (Financial, MA: OR=5.24, SEMA: OR=7.96; Emotional, MA: OR=5.52, SEMA: OR=5.71) compared to the NA group. Notably, we found no clear evidence that employing psychological strategies (SEMA) was overall more effective than simple manipulative objectives (MA) on our primary outcomes. Hence, AI-driven manipulation could become widespread even without requiring sophisticated tactics and expertise. While our findings are preliminary and derived from hypothetical, low-stakes scenarios, we highlight a critical vulnerability in human-AI interactions, emphasizing the need for ethical safeguards and regulatory frameworks to protect human autonomy.

cs.AI↗

Are LLMs Good Safety Agents or a Propaganda Engine?

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained to refuse to respond to harmful content. However, systematic analyses of whether this behavior is truly a reflection of its safety policies or an indication of political censorship, that is practiced globally by countries, is lacking. Differentiating between safety influenced refusals or politically motivated censorship is hard and unclear. For this purpose we introduce PSP, a dataset built specifically to probe the refusal behaviors in LLMs from an explicitly political context. PSP is built by formatting existing censored content from two data sources, openly available on the internet: sensitive prompts in China generalized to multiple countries, and tweets that have been censored in various countries. We study: 1) impact of political sensitivity in seven LLMs through data-driven (making PSP implicit) and representation-level approaches (erasing the concept of politics); and, 2) vulnerability of models on PSP through prompt injection attacks (PIAs). Associating censorship with refusals on content with masked implicit intent, we find that most LLMs perform some form of censorship. We conclude with summarizing major attributes that can cause a shift in refusal distributions across models and contexts of different countries.

cs.CL↗

Quriosity: Analyzing Human Questioning Behavior and Causal Inquiry through Curiosity-Driven Queries

Recent progress in Large Language Model (LLM) technology has changed our role in interacting with these models. Instead of primarily testing these models with questions we already know answers to, we are now using them for queries where the answers are unknown to us, driven by human curiosity. This shift highlights the growing need to understand curiosity-driven human questions - those that are more complex, open-ended, and reflective of real-world needs. To this end, we present Quriosity, a collection of 13.5K naturally occurring questions from three diverse sources: human-to-search-engine queries, human-to-human interactions, and human-to-LLM conversations. Our comprehensive collection enables a rich understanding of human curiosity across various domains and contexts. Our analysis reveals a significant presence of causal questions (up to 42%) in the dataset, for which we develop an iterative prompt improvement framework to identify all causal queries and examine their unique linguistic properties, cognitive complexity and source distribution. Our paper paves the way for future work on causal question identification and open-ended chatbot interactions. Our code and data are at https://github.com/roberto-ceraolo/quriosity.

cs.CL↗

The Curious Case of Curiosity across Human Cultures and LLMs

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have expanded their role in human interaction, yet curiosity -- a central driver of inquiry -- remains underexplored in these systems, particularly across cultural contexts. In this work, we investigate cultural variation in curiosity using Yahoo! Answers, a real-world multi-country dataset spanning diverse topics. We introduce CUEST (CUriosity Evaluation across SocieTies), an evaluation framework that measures human-model alignment in curiosity through linguistic (style), topic preference (content) analysis and grounding insights in social science constructs. Across open- and closed-source models, we find that LLMs flatten cross-cultural diversity, aligning more closely with how curiosity is expressed in Western countries. We then explore fine-tuning strategies to induce curiosity in LLMs, narrowing the human-model alignment gap by up to 50%. Finally, we demonstrate the practical value of curiosity for LLM adaptability across cultures, showing its importance for future NLP research.

cs.CL↗

Free Lunch for User Experience: Crowdsourcing Agents for Scalable User Studies

User studies are central to user experience research, yet recruiting participant is expensive, slow, and limited in diversity. Recent work has explored using Large Language Models as simulated users, but doubts about fidelity have hindered practical adoption. We deepen this line of research by asking whether scale itself can enable useful simulation, even if not perfectly accurate. We introduce Crowdsourcing Simulated User Agents, a method that recruits generative agents from billion-scale profile assets to act as study participants. Unlike handcrafted simulations, agents are treated as recruitable, screenable, and engageable across UX research stages. To ground this method, we demonstrate a game prototyping study with hundreds of simulated players, comparing their insights against a 10-participant local user study and a 20-participant crowdsourcing study with humans. We find a clear scaling effect: as the number of simulated user agents increases, coverage of human findings rises smoothly and plateaus around 90\%. 12.8 simulated agents are as useful as one locally recruited human, and 3.2 agents are as useful as one crowdsourced human. Results show that while individual agents are imperfect, aggregated simulations produce representative and actionable insights comparable to real users. Professional designers further rated these insights as balancing fidelity, cost, time efficiency, and usefulness. Finally, we release an agent crowdsourcing toolkit with a modular open-source pipeline and a curated pool of profiles synced from ongoing simulation research, to lower the barrier for researchers to adopt simulated participants. Together, this work contributes a validated method and reusable toolkit that expand the options for conducting scalable and practical UX studies.

cs.HC↗

Towards Region-aware Bias Evaluation Metrics

When exposed to human-generated data, language models are known to learn and amplify societal biases. While previous works introduced benchmarks that can be used to assess the bias in these models, they rely on assumptions that may not be universally true. For instance, a gender bias dimension commonly used by these metrics is that of family--career, but this may not be the only common bias in certain regions of the world. In this paper, we identify topical differences in gender bias across different regions and propose a region-aware bottom-up approach for bias assessment. Our proposed approach uses gender-aligned topics for a given region and identifies gender bias dimensions in the form of topic pairs that are likely to capture gender societal biases. Several of our proposed bias topic pairs are on par with human perception of gender biases in these regions in comparison to the existing ones, and we also identify new pairs that are more aligned than the existing ones. In addition, we use our region-aware bias topic pairs in a Word Embedding Association Test (WEAT)-based evaluation metric to test for gender biases across different regions in different data domains. We also find that LLMs have a higher alignment to bias pairs for highly-represented regions showing the importance of region-aware bias evaluation metric.

cs.CL↗

Persuasion at Play: Understanding Misinformation Dynamics in Demographic-Aware Human-LLM Interactions

Existing challenges in misinformation exposure and susceptibility vary across demographic groups, as some populations are more vulnerable to misinformation than others. Large language models (LLMs) introduce new dimensions to these challenges through their ability to generate persuasive content at scale and reinforcing existing biases. This study investigates the bidirectional persuasion dynamics between LLMs and humans when exposed to misinformative content. We analyze human-to-LLM influence using human-stance datasets and assess LLM-to-human influence by generating LLM-based persuasive arguments. Additionally, we use a multi-agent LLM framework to analyze the spread of misinformation under persuasion among demographic-oriented LLM agents. Our findings show that demographic factors influence susceptibility to misinformation in LLMs, closely reflecting the demographic-based patterns seen in human susceptibility. We also find that, similar to human demographic groups, multi-agent LLMs exhibit echo chamber behavior. This research explores the interplay between humans and LLMs, highlighting demographic differences in the context of misinformation and offering insights for future interventions.

cs.CL↗

Are Language Models Consequentialist or Deontological Moral Reasoners?

As AI systems increasingly navigate applications in healthcare, law, and governance, understanding how they handle ethically complex scenarios becomes critical. Previous work has mainly examined the moral judgments in large language models (LLMs), rather than their underlying moral reasoning process. In contrast, we focus on a large-scale analysis of the moral reasoning traces provided by LLMs. Furthermore, unlike prior work that attempted to draw inferences from only a handful of moral dilemmas, our study leverages over 600 distinct trolley problems as probes for revealing the reasoning patterns that emerge within different LLMs. We introduce and test a taxonomy of moral rationales to systematically classify reasoning traces according to two main normative ethical theories: consequentialism and deontology. Our analysis reveals that LLM chains-of-thought tend to favor deontological principles based on moral obligations, while post-hoc explanations shift notably toward consequentialist rationales that emphasize utility. Our framework provides a foundation for understanding how LLMs process and articulate ethical considerations, an important step toward safe and interpretable deployment of LLMs in high-stakes decision-making environments. Our code is available at https://github.com/keenansamway/moral-lens .

cs.CL↗

Mind the (Belief) Gap: Group Identity in the World of LLMs

Social biases and belief-driven behaviors can significantly impact Large Language Models (LLMs) decisions on several tasks. As LLMs are increasingly used in multi-agent systems for societal simulations, their ability to model fundamental group psychological characteristics remains critical yet under-explored. In this study, we present a multi-agent framework that simulates belief congruence, a classical group psychology theory that plays a crucial role in shaping societal interactions and preferences. Our findings reveal that LLMs exhibit amplified belief congruence compared to humans, across diverse contexts. We further investigate the implications of this behavior on two downstream tasks: (1) misinformation dissemination and (2) LLM learning, finding that belief congruence in LLMs increases misinformation dissemination and impedes learning. To mitigate these negative impacts, we propose strategies inspired by: (1) contact hypothesis, (2) accuracy nudges, and (3) global citizenship framework. Our results show that the best strategies reduce misinformation dissemination by up to 37% and enhance learning by 11%. Bridging social psychology and AI, our work provides insights to navigate real-world interactions using LLMs while addressing belief-driven biases.

cs.CL↗

Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment

Recent advances in general-purpose AI underscore the urgent need to align AI systems with human goals and values. Yet, the lack of a clear, shared understanding of what constitutes "alignment" limits meaningful progress and cross-disciplinary collaboration. In this position paper, we argue that the research community should explicitly define and critically reflect on "alignment" to account for the bidirectional and dynamic relationship between humans and AI. Through a systematic review of over 400 papers spanning HCI, NLP, ML, and more, we examine how alignment is currently defined and operationalized. Building on this analysis, we introduce the Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment framework, which not only incorporates traditional efforts to align AI with human values but also introduces the critical, underexplored dimension of aligning humans with AI -- supporting cognitive, behavioral, and societal adaptation to rapidly advancing AI technologies. Our findings reveal significant gaps in current literature, especially in long-term interaction design, human value modeling, and mutual understanding. We conclude with three central challenges and actionable recommendations to guide future research toward more nuanced, reciprocal, and human-AI alignment approaches.

cs.HC↗

MOMENTS: A Comprehensive Multimodal Benchmark for Theory of Mind

Understanding Theory of Mind is essential for building socially intelligent multimodal agents capable of perceiving and interpreting human behavior. We introduce MoMentS (Multimodal Mental States), a comprehensive benchmark designed to assess the ToM capabilities of multimodal large language models (LLMs) through realistic, narrative-rich scenarios presented in short films. MoMentS includes over 2,300 multiple-choice questions spanning seven distinct ToM categories. The benchmark features long video context windows and realistic social interactions that provide deeper insight into characters' mental states. We evaluate several MLLMs and find that although vision generally improves performance, models still struggle to integrate it effectively. For audio, models that process dialogues as audio do not consistently outperform transcript-based inputs. Our findings highlight the need to improve multimodal integration and point to open challenges that must be addressed to advance AI's social understanding.

cs.CL↗

Benchmarking and Improving LLM Robustness for Personalized Generation

Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in personalizing the responses of large language models (LLMs). While existing evaluations primarily focus on whether a response aligns with a user's preferences, we argue that factuality is an equally important yet often overlooked dimension. In the context of personalization, we define a model as robust if its responses are both factually accurate and align with the user preferences. To assess this, we introduce PERG, a scalable framework for evaluating robustness in LLMs, along with a new dataset, PERGData. We evaluate fourteen models from five different model families using different prompting methods. Our findings show that current LLMs struggle with robust personalization: even the strongest models (GPT-4.1, LLaMA3-70B) fail to maintain correctness in 5% of previously successful cases without personalization, while smaller models (e.g., 7B-scale) can fail more than 20% of the time. Further analysis reveals that robustness is significantly affected by the nature of the query and the type of user preference. To mitigate these failures, we propose Pref-Aligner, a two-stage approach that improves robustness by an average of 25% across models. Our work highlights critical gaps in current evaluation practices and introduces tools and metrics to support more reliable, user-aligned LLM deployments.

cs.CL↗

ISCA: A Framework for Interview-Style Conversational Agents

We present a low-compute non-generative system for implementing interview-style conversational agents which can be used to facilitate qualitative data collection through controlled interactions and quantitative analysis. Use cases include applications to tracking attitude formation or behavior change, where control or standardization over the conversational flow is desired. We show how our system can be easily adjusted through an online administrative panel to create new interviews, making the tool accessible without coding. Two case studies are presented as example applications, one regarding the Expressive Interviewing system for COVID-19 and the other a semi-structured interview to survey public opinion on emerging neurotechnology. Our code is open-source, allowing others to build off of our work and develop extensions for additional functionality.

cs.CL↗