Assessing Predictive Models for Fairness Based on Movement Patterns

Assessing the spatial fairness of predictive models involves establishing whether they are statistically penalizing (favoring) individuals associated with certain geographical locations. Literature on this topic makes the fundamental assumption that each individual is assigned to a single geographical location (e.g., place of residence). However, fairness with respect to the set of locations where one has been, i.e., their movement patterns over different regions, also matters when fairness is considered. Consequently, we argue that it is necessary to generalize the notion of spatial fairness to also include movement patterns, leading to the novel problem of assessing predictive models for fairness relative to the movements of individuals. To deal with this problem, we propose an approach that first associates the movements of individuals to certain geographic regions, considering multiple spatial partitions with different resolutions and alignments, and then employs a suitable spatial scan statistic to assess whether a predictive model is fair based on movement patterns. In the experimental evaluation, we study the performance of our approach over thousands of synthetic unfair datasets, showing that it is effective at detecting this new type of unfairness and at retrieving the set of objects treated unfairly, while localization performance exhibits a consistent multi-resolution trade-off.

Reducing Political Manipulation with Consistency Training

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit systematic political bias across a variety of sensitive contexts. We find that LLMs handle counterpart topics from opposing political sides asymmetrically. We refer to this phenomenon as covert political bias and identify 7 categories of techniques through which it operates. We propose two metrics for covert bias: Sentiment Consistency measures symmetry in rhetoric and framing across paired political prompts; Helpfulness Consistency measures symmetric depth and engagement. To reduce both types of covert bias, we introduce Political Consistency Training (PCT), an RL training method with two complementary paradigms: Sentiment Consistency Training and Helpfulness Consistency Training. We show that PCT preserves overall helpfulness, substantially reduces covert political bias, and generalizes to held-out benchmarks. We release our work at https://political-manipulation.ai

Moral Semantics Survive Machine Translation: Cross-Lingual Evidence from Moral Foundations Corpora

Moral language is subtle and culturally variable, making it difficult to translate faithfully across languages. Idiomatic expressions, slang, and cultural references introduce hard-to-avoid translation artifacts. Yet automated moral values classification depends on language-specific annotated corpora that exist almost exclusively in English. We investigate whether LLM-based translation can bridge this gap, taking Polish as a test case. Using $\sim$50k morally-annotated social media posts from a diverse range of topics, we apply a principled four-method validation pipeline: LaBSE cross-lingual embedding similarity, Centered Kernel Alignment (CKA), LLM-as-judge evaluation, and deep learning classifier parity tests. We show that despite shortcomings in handling slang, vulgarity, and culturally-loaded expressions, direct translation preserves subtle moral cues well enough to be harvested by cross-lingual machine learning -- with mean cosine similarity of 0.86 and AUC gaps of 0.01--0.02 across all foundations closing further under fine-tuning of language models. These results demonstrate that machine translation is a practical and cost-effective path to moral values research in languages currently under-resourced in this domain. We demonstrate this for Polish as a representative Slavic language, with expected generalisation to related languages.

A Comparative Evaluation of Structural Topic Models and BERTopic for Short, Open-Ended Survey Responses

Topic modeling in applied psychology increasingly spans two methodological traditions: probabilistic bag-of-words models and newer embedding-based approaches. Yet many evaluations of these methods rely on longer and cleaner benchmark corpora, leaving less guidance for short, open-ended survey responses. This paper compares Structural Topic Models (STM), a probabilistic topic model, and BERTopic, an embedding-based model, for analyzing open-ended survey responses. We evaluated three STM conditions and five BERTopic conditions, varying typographical correction, stemming, embedding choice, and contextual augmentation, a strategy we introduced to provide additional semantic context for very short responses. Results indicate that BERTopic consistently produced higher topic coherence than STM, with contextual augmentation yielding the strongest performance gains. In contrast, higher-dimensional embeddings alone did not improve coherence and were associated with greater data loss. Qualitative evaluation showed that BERTopic generated more interpretable and stable topics, while STM topics were often broader and more mixed. However, STM provides stronger support for inferential covariate analysis, whereas BERTopic covariate comparisons are primarily descriptive. These findings suggest that STM and BERTopic offer complementary strengths. We conclude with practical guidance for selecting and combining topic modeling approaches in applied social science research.

Whose Voice Counts? Mapping Stakeholder Perspectives on AI Through Public Submissions to the U.S. Government

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become more common in our daily lives, it is important to understand how different stakeholders comprehend and envisage the role that these technologies play in shaping social, political, and economic realities. In this paper, we investigate public perceptions of AI based on a corpus of letters submitted during the public consultation for the Trump Administration's US AI Action Plan. To this aim, we release a corpus cleaning pipeline and perform topic modelling and frequency analysis to explore predominant topics discussed by different subgroups (e.g., academia, individuals, private sector) and those appearing in the AI Action Plan. Our results show that individuals voice strong concerns related to the impact of AI on life, while other stakeholders are more concerned with AI development. Our comparison of topics suggests that the AI Action Plan reflects predominantly the concerns of the private sector on security, policies, and development, with individuals' concerns less represented.

IdioLink: Retrieving Meaning Beyond Words Across Idiomatic and Literal Expressions

Idioms pose a fundamental challenge for language models, as their meaning cannot be inferred from surface form alone. Understanding such expressions, therefore, requires semantic abstraction beyond lexical overlap. We introduce IdioLink, a retrieval benchmark designed to test whether models can link idiomatic expressions to conceptually equivalent meanings expressed in literal or paraphrased forms. IdioLink comprises 10,700 documents and 2,140 queries, spanning 107 idioms with both literal and figurative uses. Each document and query is annotated with spans that convey the core meaning. Evaluating strong embedding baselines (e.g., BGE, E5, Contriever, and Qwen), we show that current models struggle to retrieve equivalent meanings across divergent surface realizations, relying instead on topical and shallow semantic cues. IdioLink exposes key gaps in idiom-aware semantic retrieval and provides a challenging testbed for future models.

MTR-Suite: A Framework for Evaluating and Synthesizing Conversational Retrieval Benchmarks

Accurate evaluation of conversational retrieval is pivotal for advancing Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems. However, existing conversational retrieval benchmarks suffer from costly, sparse human annotation or rigid, unnatural automated heuristics. To address these challenges, we introduce MTR-Suite, a unified framework for auditing, synthesizing, and benchmarking retrieval. It features: (1) MTR-Eval, an LLM-based auditor quantifying alignment gaps in previous benchmarks; (2) MTR-Pipeline, a multi-agent system using greedy traversal clustering to generate high-fidelity dialogues at 1/400th human cost; and (3) MTR-Bench, a rigorous general-domain benchmark. MTR-Bench mimics production-style challenges (hard topic switching, verbosity), offering superior discriminative power. We make our code and data publicly available to facilitate future research at https://github.com/rangehow/mtr-suite.

Bridging the Cold-Start Gap: LLM-Powered Synthetic Data Generation for Natural Language Search at Airbnb

Deploying natural language search systems presents a critical cold-start challenge: no real user queries to learn linguistic patterns, and no relevance labels to train ranking models. We present a framework for generating synthetic queries and labels using large language models (LLMs), powering model training and evaluation for Airbnb's natural language search. For query generation, we combine contrastive listing pairs from booking sessions with seed queries from user research to balance realism and diversity, enabling a cold-to-warm start transition as real user data becomes available. For label generation, we introduce contrastive generation that produces topicality labels by construction, and Virtual Judge (VJ) labeling for broader coverage. We compare our approach against a no-seed contrastive baseline and an InPars-style baseline. For query length, the InPars baseline produces verbose queries with KL divergence of 12.03 vs. real users; our seed-guided approach achieves 0.66, a 7.5x improvement. For attribute type distributions, our approach achieves the lowest KL divergence (0.04), outperforming even seed queries (0.09). Experiments show our approach produces harder evaluation examples than the no-seed baseline (79% vs. 97% pairwise accuracy), providing discriminative signal for model improvement. We deploy production pipelines generating synthetic examples daily for embedding-based retrieval and ranking evaluation.

USV: Towards Understanding the User-generated Short-form Videos

Several large-scale video datasets have been published these years and have advanced the area of video understanding. However, the newly emerged user-generated short-form videos have rarely been studied. This paper presents USV, the User-generated Short-form Video dataset for high-level semantic video understanding. The dataset contains around 224K videos collected from UGC platforms by label queries without extra manual verification and trimming. Although video understanding has achieved plausible improvement these years, most works focus on instance-level recognition, which is not sufficient for learning the representation of the high-level semantic information of videos. Therefore, we further establish two tasks: topic recognition and video-text retrieval on USV. We propose two unified and effective baseline methods Multi-Modality Fusion Network (MMF-Net) and Video-Text Contrastive Learning (VTCL), to tackle the topic recognition task and video-text retrieval respectively, and carry out comprehensive benchmarks to facilitate future research. Our project page is https://usvdataset.github.io.

The Shape of Testimony: A Scalable Framework for Oral History Archive Comparison

Researchers in Holocaust studies have often distinguished between two styles of oral survivor testimony: the USC Shoah Foundation's interviews tend to follow a structured, interviewer-guided format, whereas the Yale Fortunoff Video Archive generally favors a more free-form, open-ended style. This distinction has influenced both scholarly research and the development of later archives. In this study, we critically examine that claim by conducting a large-scale computational analysis of more than 1,600 testimonies from both collections. Leveraging discourse segmentation, topic modeling, and large language model (LLM) based analysis, we quantify the "structuredness" level of testimonies through topic coherence, interviewer-survivor dynamics, and the distribution of question types. Our results generally corroborate the structural differences identified in earlier research, while also revealing significant overlaps between the collections, both within individual interviews and across common narrative patterns. This complicates the simple "structured vs. free-form" dichotomy often applied to these oral histories. Beyond revisiting a foundational claim in Holocaust studies, our work provides a scalable, replicable framework for comparative corpus analysis. As a proof of concept, it suggests broader applications for digital oral history, narrative analysis, and the design of citizen-science annotation platforms.