Profanity detection is often thought to be an easy task. However, past work has shown that current, list-based systems are performing poorly. They fail to adapt to evolving profane slang, identify profane terms that have been disguised or only partially censored (e.g., @ss, f$#%) or intentionally or unintentionally misspelled (e.g., biatch, shiiiit). For these reasons, they are easy to circumvent and have very poor recall. Secondly, they are a one-size fits all solution – making assumptions that the definition, use and perceptions of profane or inappropriate holds across all contexts. In this article, we present work that attempts to move beyond list-based profanity detection systems by identifying the context in which profanity occurs. The proposed system uses a set of comments from a social news site labeled by Amazon Mechanical Turk workers for the presence of profanity. This system far surpasses the performance of list-based profanity detection techniques. The use of crowdsourcing in this task suggests an opportunity to build profanity detection systems tailored to sites and communities.

Illegal extraction of forest resources is fought, in many developing countries, by patrols through the forest that seek to deter such activity by decreasing its profitability. With limited resources for performing such patrols, a patrol strategy will seek to distribute the patrols throughout the forest, in space and time, in order to minimize the resulting amount of extraction that occurs or maximize the degree of forest protection, according to one of several potential metrics. We pose this problem as a Stackelberg game. We adopt and extend the simple, geometrically elegant model of (Albers 2010). First, we study optimal allocations of patrol density under generalizations of this model, relaxing several of its assumptions. Second, we pose the problem of generating actual schedules whose site visit frequencies are consistent with the analytically computed optimal patrol densities.

Traditional social science research has been unable to satisfactorily aggregate individual level data to group, organization and systems levels, making it one of social science’s biggest challenges (Giles, 2011). For game and social theory, we believe that the fault can be attributed to the lack of valid distance measures (e.g., the arbitrary ordering of cooperation and competition precludes a Hilbert space distance metric for the ordering of and gradations between these social behaviors, making game theory normative). Alternatively, we offer a theory of social interdependence with countable mathematics based on bistable or multi-stable perspectives and linear algebra. The evidence that is available is supportive. It indicates that meaning is a one-sided, stable, classical interpretation, not only making the correspondence between beliefs and objective reality in social settings incomplete, raising questioning about static theories from earlier eras (i.e., Axelrod’s evolution of cooperation; Simon’s bounded rationality). The result indicates for open systems (democracies) that interpretations evolve naturally to become orthogonal (Nash equilibria), that orthogonal interpretations generate the information to drive social evolution, but that in closed systems (dictatorships), dependent on the enforcement of social cooperation and the suppression of opposing points of view, evolution slows or stops (e.g., China, Iran or Cuba), causing capital and energy to be wasted, misdirected or misallocated as leaders suppress the interpretations that they alone have the authority to label as unethical, immoral, or irreligious. We conclude that a mathematics based on NE is feasible.

Political discourse in the United States is getting increasingly polarized. This polarization frequently causes different communities to react very differently to the same news events. Political blogs as a form of social media provide an unique insight into this phenomenon. We present a multitarget, semisupervised latent variable model, MCR-LDA to model this process by analyzing political blogs posts and their comment sections from different political communities jointly to predict the degree of polarization that news topics cause. Inspecting the model after inference reveals topics and the degree to which it triggers polarization. In this approach, community responses to news topics are observed using sentiment polarity and comment volume which serves as a proxy for the level of interest in the topic. In this context, we also present computational methods to assign sentiment polarity to the comments which serve as targets for latent variable models that predict the polarity based on the topics in the blog content. Our results show that the joint modeling of communities with different political beliefs using MCR-LDA does not sacrifice accuracy in sentiment polarity prediction when compared to approaches that are tailored to specific communities and additionally provides a view of the polarization in responses from the different communities.

This research seeks to identify online participants' disposi tion and skills. A prototype dashboard and annotation scheme were developed to support facilitators and several computational predictors were identified that show statisti cally significant correlations with dialogue skills as ob served by human annotators.

Argumentation is a human-like reasoning mechanism contributing to the formalization of commonsense reasoning. In the last decade, several argument-based formalisms have emerged, with application in many areas, such as legal reasoning, autonomous agents and multi-agent systems; many are based on Dung’s seminal work characterizing Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AF). Recent research in the area has led to Temporal Argumentation Frameworks (TAF) that extend Dung’s by considering the temporal availability of arguments. In this work we introduce a novel framework, called Extended Temporal Argumentation Framework (E-TAF), extending TAF with the capability of modeling availability of attacks among arguments, which allows for instance to model reliability of arguments varying over time. We show how E-TAF can be enriched by considering Structured Abstract Argumentation, adding compositional elements to the abstract arguments involved based on a simplified version of the recently introduced Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks.

Winter news from the Association for Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. Includes the Independent Auditor's Report.

This article is devoted to the study of methods to change defeasible logic programs (de.l.p.s) which are the knowledge bases used by the Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) interpreter. DeLP is an argumentation formalism that allows to reason over potentially inconsistent de.l.p.s. Argument Theory Change (ATC) studies certain aspects of belief revision in order to make them suitable for abstract argumentation systems. In this article, abstract arguments are rendered concrete by using the particular rule-based defeasible logic adopted by DeLP. The objective of our proposal is to define prioritized argument revision operators \`a la ATC for de.l.p.s, in such a way that the newly inserted argument ends up undefeated after the revision, thus warranting its conclusion. In order to ensure this warrant, the de.l.p. has to be changed in concordance with a minimal change principle. To this end, we discuss different minimal change criteria that could be adopted. Finally, an algorithm is presented, implementing the argument revision operations.

In this paper we analyze judgement aggregation problems in which a group of agents independently votes on a set of complex propositions that has some interdependency constraint between them(e.g., transitivity when describing preferences). We consider the issue of judgement aggregation from the perspective of approximation. That is, we generalize the previous results by studying approximate judgement aggregation. We relax the main two constraints assumed in the current literature, Consistency and Independence and consider mechanisms that only approximately satisfy these constraints, that is, satisfy them up to a small portion of the inputs. The main question we raise is whether the relaxation of these notions significantly alters the class of satisfying aggregation mechanisms. The recent works for preference aggregation of Kalai, Mossel, and Keller fit into this framework. The main result of this paper is that, as in the case of preference aggregation, in the case of a subclass of a natural class of aggregation problems termed `truth-functional agendas', the set of satisfying aggregation mechanisms does not extend non-trivially when relaxing the constraints. Our proof techniques involve Boolean Fourier transform and analysis of voter influences for voting protocols. The question we raise for Approximate Aggregation can be stated in terms of Property Testing. For instance, as a corollary from our result we get a generalization of the classic result for property testing of linearity of Boolean functions. An updated version (RePEc:huj:dispap:dp574R) is available at http://www.ratio.huji.ac.il/dp_files/dp574R.pdf

Machine learning approaches to multi-label document classification have to date largely relied on discriminative modeling techniques such as support vector machines. A drawback of these approaches is that performance rapidly drops off as the total number of labels and the number of labels per document increase. This problem is amplified when the label frequencies exhibit the type of highly skewed distributions that are often observed in real-world datasets. In this paper we investigate a class of generative statistical topic models for multi-label documents that associate individual word tokens with different labels. We investigate the advantages of this approach relative to discriminative models, particularly with respect to classification problems involving large numbers of relatively rare labels. We compare the performance of generative and discriminative approaches on document labeling tasks ranging from datasets with several thousand labels to datasets with tens of labels. The experimental results indicate that probabilistic generative models can achieve competitive multi-label classification performance compared to discriminative methods, and have advantages for datasets with many labels and skewed label frequencies.