Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Mathematical Framework for Online Social Media Auditing (2209.05550v2)

Published 12 Sep 2022 in cs.LG, cs.SI, stat.CO, and stat.ML

Abstract: Social media platforms (SMPs) leverage algorithmic filtering (AF) as a means of selecting the content that constitutes a user's feed with the aim of maximizing their rewards. Selectively choosing the contents to be shown on the user's feed may yield a certain extent of influence, either minor or major, on the user's decision-making, compared to what it would have been under a natural/fair content selection. As we have witnessed over the past decade, algorithmic filtering can cause detrimental side effects, ranging from biasing individual decisions to shaping those of society as a whole, for example, diverting users' attention from whether to get the COVID-19 vaccine or inducing the public to choose a presidential candidate. The government's constant attempts to regulate the adverse effects of AF are often complicated, due to bureaucracy, legal affairs, and financial considerations. On the other hand SMPs seek to monitor their own algorithmic activities to avoid being fined for exceeding the allowable threshold. In this paper, we mathematically formalize this framework and utilize it to construct a data-driven statistical auditing procedure to regulate AF from deflecting users' beliefs over time, along with sample complexity guarantees. This state-of-the-art algorithm can be used either by authorities acting as external regulators or by SMPs for self-auditing.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (63)
  1. Optimal testing for properties of distributions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 28, 2015.
  2. Bayesian learning in social networks. The Review of Economic Studies, 78(4):1201–1236, 2011.
  3. J Anderson and L. Rainie. The future of truth and misinformation online. Pew Research Center, 2017.
  4. Abhijit V Banerjee. A simple model of herd behavior. The quarterly journal of economics, 107(3):797–817, 1992.
  5. Hal Berghel. Lies, damn lies, and fake news. Computer, 50(2):80–85, 2017.
  6. Testing closeness of discrete distributions. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 60(1):1–25, 2013.
  7. Aaron Blake. A new study suggests fake news might have won donald trump the 2016 election. 2018.
  8. Oversight Board. Ensuring respect for free expression, through independent judgment. March 2020.
  9. Engin Bozdag. Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics and information technology, 15(3):209–227, 2013.
  10. Valerie C Brannon. Free speech and the regulation of social media content. Congressional Research Service, 27, 2019.
  11. A. Campbell. How data privacy laws can fight fake news. Just security, 2019.
  12. Robyn Caplan. 29 algorithmic filtering. Mediated Communication, page 561, 2018.
  13. The use of social media in nutrition interventions for adolescents and young adults—a systematic review. International journal of medical informatics, 120:77–91, 2018.
  14. Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. Calif. L. Rev., 107:1753, 2019.
  15. Learning and testing irreducible markov chains via the k𝑘kitalic_k-cover time. In Vitaly Feldman, Katrina Ligett, and Sivan Sabato, editors, Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory, volume 132 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 458–480. PMLR, 16–19 Mar 2021.
  16. Optimal algorithms for testing closeness of discrete distributions. In Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms, pages 1193–1203. SIAM, 2014.
  17. Alexandra Chouldechova. Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments. Big data, 5(2):153–163, 2017.
  18. The price of tolerance in distribution testing. In Proceedings of Thirty Fifth Conference on Learning Theory, volume 178 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 573–624. PMLR, 02–05 Jul 2022.
  19. A user-driven framework for regulating and auditing social media. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10525, 2023.
  20. Regulating algorithmic filtering on social media. arXiv preprint: arxiv.org/pdf/2006.09647v3.pdf, 2020.
  21. Regulating algorithmic filtering on social media. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 34, pages 6997–7011. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021.
  22. Elements of Information Theory (Wiley Series in Telecommunications and Signal Processing). Wiley-Interscience, USA, 2006.
  23. Disinformation and ‘fake news’. 2019.
  24. Testing symmetric markov chains from a single trajectory. In Conference On Learning Theory, pages 385–409. PMLR, 2018.
  25. ” algorithms ruin everything” # riptwitter, folk theories, and resistance to algorithmic change in social media. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 3163–3174, 2017.
  26. Which distribution distances are sublinearly testable? In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 2747–2764. SIAM, 2018.
  27. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In Theory of cryptography conference, pages 265–284. Springer, 2006.
  28. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci., 9(3-4):211–407, 2014.
  29. Automated hate speech detection and the problem of offensive language. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 11, pages 512–515, 2017.
  30. Dipayan Ghosh. A new digital social contract is coming for silicon valley. Harvard Business Review, 27, 2019.
  31. The Independent. Amid capitol violence, facebook, youtube remove trump video. January 2021.
  32. Social media for health promotion and weight management: a critical debate. BMC public health, 18(1):1–7, 2018.
  33. A systematic review of hate speech automatic detection using natural language processing. CoRR, abs/2106.00742, 2021.
  34. Breaching the contract? using social contract theory to explain individuals’ online behavior to safeguard privacy. Media Psychology, 23(2):269–292, 2020.
  35. Kate Klonick. The new governors: The people, rules, and processes governing online speech. Harv. L. Rev., 131:1598, 2017.
  36. Botond Koszegi. Behavioral contract theory. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(4):1075–1118, 2014.
  37. Jovan Kurbalija. An introduction to internet governance. Diplo Foundation, 2016.
  38. Francis LF Lee. Impact of social media on opinion polarization in varying times. Communication and the Public, 1(1):56–71, 2016.
  39. Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online. New York: Data & Society Research Institute, 2017.
  40. Testing properties of collections of distributions. volume 17, pages 179–194, 01 2011.
  41. Alan Manning. Implicit contract theory. Current Issues in Labour Economics, page 63, 1989.
  42. Rotem Medzini. Enhanced self-regulation: The case of facebook’s content governance. New Media & Society, page 1461444821989352, 2021.
  43. The modern news consumer: News attitudes and practices in the digital era. 2016.
  44. Open issues in combating fake news: Interpretability as an opportunity. arXiv:1711.04024, 2019.
  45. A theory of non-bayesian social learning. Econometrica, 86(2):445–490, 2018.
  46. BBC News. Twitter suspends 70,000 accounts linked to qanon. January 2021.
  47. Social media definition and the governance challenge-an introduction to the special issue. Obar, JA and Wildman, S.(2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue. Telecommunications policy, 39(9):745–750, 2015.
  48. Eli Pariser. How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. 2011.
  49. Jeannette Paschen. Investigating the emotional appeal of fake news using artificial intelligence and human contributions. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 05 2019.
  50. Ross D Petty. Marketing without consent: Consumer choice and costs, privacy, and public policy. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1):42–53, 2000.
  51. Kelly Quinn. Why we share: A uses and gratifications approach to privacy regulation in social media use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1):61–86, 2016.
  52. Automatic detection of hate speech on facebook using sentiment and emotion analysis. In 2019 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Information and Communication (ICAIIC), pages 169–174, 2019.
  53. Rumor source detection with multiple observations under adaptive diffusions. IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, 8(1):2–12, 2020.
  54. Multiple random walks on graphs: mixing few to cover many. Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 32(4):594–637, 2023.
  55. Potential for Discrimination in Online Targeted Advertising. In Sorelle A. Friedler and Christo Wilson, editors, Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, volume 81 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 5–19, New York, NY, USA, 23–24 Feb 2018. PMLR.
  56. Analyzing and mining comments and comment ratings on the social web. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), 8(3):1–39, 2014.
  57. Social media users’ legal consciousness about privacy. Social Media+ Society, 3(1):2056305117695325, 2017.
  58. Latanya Sweeney. Discrimination in online ad delivery: Google ads, black names and white names, racial discrimination, and click advertising. Queue, 11(3):10–29, 2013.
  59. Minimax learning of ergodic markov chains. In Algorithmic Learning Theory, pages 904–930. PMLR, 2019.
  60. Minimax testing of identity to a reference ergodic markov chain. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 191–201. PMLR, 2020.
  61. A right to reasonable inferences: re-thinking data protection law in the age of big data and AI. Colum. Bus. L. Rev., page 494, 2019.
  62. World Economic Forum. World economic forum global agenda council on the future of software and society. A call for agile governance principles. Technical report, 2016. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/IP/2016/ICT/Agile_Governance_Summary.pdf.
  63. A statistical framework for differential privacy. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(489):375–389, 2010.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (2)
  1. Wasim Huleihel (38 papers)
  2. Yehonathan Refael (9 papers)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets