arXiv subjects

Walter Quattrociocchi

Publications and source records attributed to Walter Quattrociocchi.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

AI advice suppresses people's willingness to say "I don't know", even when the advice is wrong and accuracy is incentivized

Knowing when to say "I don't know" is fundamental to human judgment, yet AI assistants offer a fluent answer to almost any question. In five experiments (N = 3,132; four preregistered, one direct replication), participants answered difficult questions and could always decline to respond. We engineered the questions so that AI advice was wrong, separating AI use from its accuracy. Merely having access to AI nearly eliminated participants' willingness to suspend judgment, and this held whether the advice was actively requested or simply displayed. Consequently, participants answered more questions but were correct about a third as often as when AI was unavailable-yet their confidence nearly doubled. Incentivizing accuracy and penalizing inaccuracy led participants to seek and follow AI advice less, answer more accurately, and suspend judgment more often, though still far less than when AI was unavailable. As AI suggestions grow ubiquitous and unsolicited, they may not simply affect answer accuracy; they may even alter the metacognitive threshold at which people decide whether they know enough to answer.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Platform Sorting Drives Ideological Fragmentation in the Social Media Ecosystem

Ideological asymmetries in online political communication are often studied as localized phenomena emerging within communities. Here, we show that fragmentation instead operates at the level of entire platforms, consistent with a process of platform sorting in which users increasingly align with ideologically congruent environments. We analyze political information dynamics across Bluesky, Facebook, Reddit, Truth Social, Twitter/X, and YouTube during the 2020 and 2024 US presidential elections, combining measures of content sharing, engagement allocation, and user-level ideological orientation. Across platforms, ideological fragmentation emerges consistently and persists over time. Platforms exhibit distinct ideological profiles that persist across the two election cycles, ranging from strongly left-leaning to strongly right-leaning environments. Longitudinal analyses further reveal limited ideological variability among persistent user cohorts, indicating that apparent changes within single platforms reflect ecosystem-level sorting rather than convergence toward neutrality. Taken together, our results show that the dynamics of platform sorting is not a transient reaction to political events or moderation interventions, but a persistent structural feature of the social media ecosystem.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

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↗

arXiv2026

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↗

arXiv2026

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↗

arXiv2025

Epistemological Fault Lines Between Human and Artificial Intelligence

Large language models (LLMs) are widely described as artificial intelligence, yet their epistemic profile diverges sharply from human cognition. Here we show that the apparent alignment between human and machine outputs conceals a deeper structural mismatch in how judgments are produced. Tracing the historical shift from symbolic AI and information filtering systems to large-scale generative transformers, we argue that LLMs are not epistemic agents but stochastic pattern-completion systems, formally describable as walks on high-dimensional graphs of linguistic transitions rather than as systems that form beliefs or models of the world. By systematically mapping human and artificial epistemic pipelines, we identify seven epistemic fault lines, divergences in grounding, parsing, experience, motivation, causal reasoning, metacognition, and value. We call the resulting condition Epistemia: a structural situation in which linguistic plausibility substitutes for epistemic evaluation, producing the feeling of knowing without the labor of judgment. We conclude by outlining consequences for evaluation, governance, and epistemic literacy in societies increasingly organized around generative AI.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

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↗

arXiv2025

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↗

arXiv2025

Towards global equity in political polarization research

With a folk understanding that political polarization refers to socio-political divisions within a society, many have proclaimed that we are more divided than ever. In this account, polarization has been blamed for populism, the erosion of social cohesion, the loss of trust in the institutions of democracy, legislative dysfunction, and the collective failure to address existential risks such as Covid-19 or climate change. However, at a global scale there is surprisingly little academic literature which conclusively supports these claims, with half of all studies being U.S.-focused. Here, we provide an overview of the global state of research on polarization, highlighting insights that are robust across countries, those unique to specific contexts, and key gaps in the literature. We argue that addressing these gaps is urgent, but has been hindered thus far by systemic and cultural barriers, such as regionally stratified restrictions on data access and misaligned research incentives. If continued cross-disciplinary inertia means that these disparities are left unaddressed, we see a substantial risk that countries will adopt policies to tackle polarization based on inappropriate evidence, risking flawed decision-making and the weakening of democratic institutions.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior and Information Spreading on Twitter

We explore the effects of coordinated users (i.e., users characterized by an unexpected, suspicious, or exceptional similarity) in information spreading on Twitter by quantifying the efficacy of their tactics in deceiving feed algorithms to maximize information outreach. In particular, we investigate the behavior of coordinated accounts within a large set of retweet-based information cascades identifying key differences between coordinated and non-coordinated accounts in terms of position within the cascade, action delay and outreach. On average, coordinated accounts occupy higher positions of the information cascade (i.e., closer to the root), spread messages faster and involve a slightly higher number of users. When considering cascade metrics such as size, number of edges and height, we observe clear differences among information cascades that are associated to a systematically larger proportion of coordinated accounts, as confirmed by comparisons with statistical null models. To further characterize the activity of coordinated accounts we introduce two new measures capturing their infectivity within the information cascade (i.e., their ability to involve other users) and their interaction with non-coordinated accounts. Finally, we find that the interaction pattern between the two classes of users follows a saturation-like process. A larger-scale targeting of non-coordinated users does not require a larger amount of coordinated accounts after a threshold value approximately 50%, after which involving more coordinated accounts within a cascade yields a null marginal effect. Our results contribute to shed light on the role of coordinated accounts and their effect on information diffusion.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

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↗

arXiv2025

From Niche to Mainstream: Community Size and Engagement in Social Media Conversations

The architecture of public discourse has been profoundly reshaped by social media platforms, which mediate interactions at an unprecedented scale and complexity. This study analyzes user behavior across six platforms over 33 years, exploring how the size of conversations and communities influences dialogue dynamics. Our findings reveal that smaller platforms foster richer, more sustained interactions, while larger platforms drive broader but shorter participation. Moreover, we observe that the propensity for users to re-engage in a conversation decreases as community size grows, with niche environments as a notable exception, where participation remains robust. These findings show an interdependence between platform architecture, user engagement, and community dynamics, shedding light on how digital ecosystems shape the structure and quality of public discourse.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

Quantifying Polarization: A Comparative Study of Measures and Methods

Political polarization, a key driver of social fragmentation, has drawn increasing attention for its role in shaping online and offline discourse. Despite significant efforts, accurately measuring polarization within ideological distributions remains a challenge. This study evaluates five widely used polarization measures, testing their strengths and weaknesses with synthetic datasets and a real-world case study on YouTube discussions during the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Building on these findings, we present a novel adaptation of Kleinberg's burst detection algorithm to improve mode detection in polarized distributions. By offering both a critical review and an innovative methodological tool, this work advances the analysis of ideological patterns in social media discourse.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

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↗

arXiv2024

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↗

arXiv2024

Ideological Fragmentation of the Social Media Ecosystem: From echo chambers to echo platforms

The entertainment-driven nature of social media encourages users to engage with like-minded individuals and consume content aligned with their beliefs, limiting exposure to diverse perspectives. Simultaneously, users migrate between platforms, either due to moderation policies like de-platforming or in search of environments better suited to their preferences. These dynamics drive the specialization of the social media ecosystem, shifting from internal echo chambers to "echo platforms"--entire platforms functioning as ideologically homogeneous niches. To systematically analyze this phenomenon in political discussions, we propose a quantitative approach based on three key dimensions: platform centrality, news consumption, and user base composition. We analyze 117 million posts related to the 2020 US Presidential elections from nine social media platforms--Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, YouTube, BitChute, Gab, Parler, Scored, and Voat. Our findings reveal significant differences among platforms in their centrality within the ecosystem, the reliability of circulated news, and the ideological diversity of their users, highlighting a clear divide between mainstream and alt-tech platforms. The latter occupy a peripheral role, feature a higher prevalence of unreliable content, and exhibit greater ideological uniformity. These results highlight the key dimensions shaping the fragmentation and polarization of the social media landscape.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Evaluating the effect of viral news on social media engagement

This study examines Facebook and YouTube content from over a thousand news outlets in four European languages from 2018 to 2023, using a Bayesian structural time-series model to evaluate the impact of viral posts. Our results show that most viral events do not significantly increase engagement and rarely lead to sustained growth. The virality effect usually depends on the engagement trend preceding the viral post, typically reversing it. When news emerges unexpectedly, viral events enhances users' engagement, reactivating the collective response process. In contrast, when virality manifests after a sustained growth phase, it represents the final burst of that growth process, followed by a decline in attention. Moreover, quick viral effects fade faster, while slower processes lead to more persistent growth. These findings highlight the transient effect of viral events and underscore the importance of consistent, steady attention-building strategies to establish a solid connection with the user base rather than relying on sudden visibility spikes.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2024

Decoding Political Polarization in Social Media Interactions

Social media platforms significantly influence ideological divisions by enabling users to select information that aligns with their beliefs and avoid opposing viewpoints. Analyzing approximately 47 million Facebook posts, this study investigates the interactions of around 170 million users with news pages, revealing distinct patterns based on political orientations. While users generally prefer content that reflects their political biases, the extent of engagement varies even among individuals with similar ideological leanings. Specifically, political biases heavily influence commenting behaviors, particularly among users leaning towards the center-left and the right. Conversely, the 'likes' from center-left and centrist users are more indicative of their political affiliations. This research illuminates the complex relationship between social media behavior and political polarization, offering new insights into the manifestation of ideological divisions online.

cs.SI↗