Topic modelling, as a well-established unsupervised technique, has found extensive use in automatically detecting significant topics within a corpus of documents. However, classic topic modelling approaches (e.g., LDA) have certain drawbacks, such as the lack of semantic understanding and the presence of overlapping topics. In this work, we investigate the untapped potential of large language models (LLMs) as an alternative for uncovering the underlying topics within extensive text corpora. To this end, we introduce a framework that prompts LLMs to generate topics from a given set of documents and establish evaluation protocols to assess the clustering efficacy of LLMs. Our findings indicate that LLMs with appropriate prompts can stand out as a viable alternative, capable of generating relevant topic titles and adhering to human guidelines to refine and merge topics. Through in-depth experiments and evaluation, we summarise the advantages and constraints of employing LLMs in topic extraction.
In this paper, we address the limitations of the common data annotation and training methods for objective single-label classification tasks. Typically, when annotating such tasks annotators are only asked to provide a single label for each sample and annotator disagreement is discarded when a final hard label is decided through majority voting. We challenge this traditional approach, acknowledging that determining the appropriate label can be difficult due to the ambiguity and lack of context in the data samples. Rather than discarding the information from such ambiguous annotations, our soft label method makes use of them for training. Our findings indicate that additional annotator information, such as confidence, secondary label and disagreement, can be used to effectively generate soft labels. Training classifiers with these soft labels then leads to improved performance and calibration on the hard label test set.
The use of abusive language online has become an increasingly pervasive problem that damages both individuals and society, with effects ranging from psychological harm right through to escalation to real-life violence and even death. Machine learning models have been developed to automatically detect abusive language, but these models can suffer from temporal bias, the phenomenon in which topics, language use or social norms change over time. This study aims to investigate the nature and impact of temporal bias in abusive language detection across various languages and explore mitigation methods. We evaluate the performance of models on abusive data sets from different time periods. Our results demonstrate that temporal bias is a significant challenge for abusive language detection, with models trained on historical data showing a significant drop in performance over time. We also present an extensive linguistic analysis of these abusive data sets from a diachronic perspective, aiming to explore the reasons for language evolution and performance decline. This study sheds light on the pervasive issue of temporal bias in abusive language detection across languages, offering crucial insights into language evolution and temporal bias mitigation.
A crucial aspect of a rumor detection model is its ability to generalize, particularly its ability to detect emerging, previously unknown rumors. Past research has indicated that content-based (i.e., using solely source posts as input) rumor detection models tend to perform less effectively on unseen rumors. At the same time, the potential of context-based models remains largely untapped. The main contribution of this paper is in the in-depth evaluation of the performance gap between content and context-based models specifically on detecting new, unseen rumors. Our empirical findings demonstrate that context-based models are still overly dependent on the information derived from the rumors' source post and tend to overlook the significant role that contextual information can play. We also study the effect of data split strategies on classifier performance. Based on our experimental results, the paper also offers practical suggestions on how to minimize the effects of temporal concept drift in static datasets during the training of rumor detection methods.
A large number of conflict events are affecting the world all the time. In order to analyse such conflict events effectively, this paper presents a Classification-Aware Neural Topic Model (CANTM-IA) for Conflict Information Classification and Topic Discovery. The model provides a reliable interpretation of classification results and discovered topics by introducing interpretability analysis. At the same time, interpretation is introduced into the model architecture to improve the classification performance of the model and to allow interpretation to focus further on the details of the data. Finally, the model architecture is optimised to reduce the complexity of the model.
Instruction-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive language understanding and the capacity to generate responses that follow specific instructions. However, due to the computational demands associated with training these models, their applications often rely on zero-shot settings. In this paper, we evaluate the zero-shot performance of two publicly accessible LLMs, ChatGPT and OpenAssistant, in the context of Computational Social Science classification tasks, while also investigating the effects of various prompting strategies. Our experiment considers the impact of prompt complexity, including the effect of incorporating label definitions into the prompt, using synonyms for label names, and the influence of integrating past memories during the foundation model training. The findings indicate that in a zero-shot setting, the current LLMs are unable to match the performance of smaller, fine-tuned baseline transformer models (such as BERT). Additionally, we find that different prompting strategies can significantly affect classification accuracy, with variations in accuracy and F1 scores exceeding 10%.
The COVID-19 pandemic led to an infodemic where an overwhelming amount of COVID-19 related content was being disseminated at high velocity through social media. This made it challenging for citizens to differentiate between accurate and inaccurate information about COVID-19. This motivated us to carry out a comparative study of the characteristics of COVID-19 misinformation versus those of accurate COVID-19 information through a large-scale computational analysis of over 242 million tweets. The study makes comparisons alongside four key aspects: 1) the distribution of topics, 2) the live status of tweets, 3) language analysis and 4) the spreading power over time. An added contribution of this study is the creation of a COVID-19 misinformation classification dataset. Finally, we demonstrate that this new dataset helps improve misinformation classification by more than 9% based on average F1 measure.
Previous studies have highlighted the importance of vaccination as an effective strategy to control the transmission of the COVID-19 virus. It is crucial for policymakers to have a comprehensive understanding of the public's stance towards vaccination on a large scale. However, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, such as pro-vaccine or vaccine hesitancy, have evolved over time on social media. Thus, it is necessary to account for possible temporal shifts when analysing these stances. This study aims to examine the impact of temporal concept drift on stance detection towards COVID-19 vaccination on Twitter. To this end, we evaluate a range of transformer-based models using chronological and random splits of social media data. Our findings demonstrate significant discrepancies in model performance when comparing random and chronological splits across all monolingual and multilingual datasets. Chronological splits significantly reduce the accuracy of stance classification. Therefore, real-world stance detection approaches need to be further refined to incorporate temporal factors as a key consideration.
New events emerge over time influencing the topics of rumors in social media. Current rumor detection benchmarks use random splits as training, development and test sets which typically results in topical overlaps. Consequently, models trained on random splits may not perform well on rumor classification on previously unseen topics due to the temporal concept drift. In this paper, we provide a re-evaluation of classification models on four popular rumor detection benchmarks considering chronological instead of random splits. Our experimental results show that the use of random splits can significantly overestimate predictive performance across all datasets and models. Therefore, we suggest that rumor detection models should always be evaluated using chronological splits for minimizing topical overlaps.
Vaccine hesitancy has been a common concern, probably since vaccines were created and, with the popularisation of social media, people started to express their concerns about vaccines online alongside those posting pro- and anti-vaccine content. Predictably, since the first mentions of a COVID-19 vaccine, social media users posted about their fears and concerns or about their support and belief into the effectiveness of these rapidly developing vaccines. Identifying and understanding the reasons behind public hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines is important for policy markers that need to develop actions to better inform the population with the aim of increasing vaccine take-up. In the case of COVID-19, where the fast development of the vaccines was mirrored closely by growth in anti-vaxx disinformation, automatic means of detecting citizen attitudes towards vaccination became necessary. This is an important computational social sciences task that requires data analysis in order to gain in-depth understanding of the phenomena at hand. Annotated data is also necessary for training data-driven models for more nuanced analysis of attitudes towards vaccination. To this end, we created a new collection of over 3,101 tweets annotated with users' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination (stance). Besides, we also develop a domain-specific language model (VaxxBERT) that achieves the best predictive performance (73.0 accuracy and 69.3 F1-score) as compared to a robust set of baselines. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first dataset and model that model vaccine hesitancy as a category distinct from pro- and anti-vaccine stance.