The ability of Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods to categorize text into multiple classes has motivated their use in online content moderation tasks, such as hate speech and fake news detection. However, there is limited understanding of how or why these methods make such decisions, or why certain content is moderated in the first place. To investigate the hidden mechanisms behind content moderation, we explore multiple directions: 1) training classifiers to reverse-engineer content moderation decisions across countries; 2) explaining content moderation decisions by analyzing Shapley values and LLM-guided explanations. Our primary focus is on content moderation decisions made across countries, using pre-existing corpora sampled from the Twitter Stream Grab. Our experiments reveal interesting patterns in censored posts, both across countries and over time. Through human evaluations of LLM-generated explanations across three LLMs, we assess the effectiveness of using LLMs in content moderation. Finally, we discuss potential future directions, as well as the limitations and ethical considerations of this work. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/causalNLP/censorship

Synthetic data has garnered attention as a Privacy Enhancing Technology (PET) in sectors such as healthcare and finance. When using synthetic data in practical applications, it is important to provide protection guarantees. In the literature, two family of approaches are proposed for tabular data: on the one hand, Similarity-based methods aim at finding the level of similarity between training and synthetic data. Indeed, a privacy breach can occur if the generated data is consistently too similar or even identical to the train data. On the other hand, Attack-based methods conduce deliberate attacks on synthetic datasets. The success rates of these attacks reveal how secure the synthetic datasets are. In this paper, we introduce a contrastive method that improves privacy assessment of synthetic datasets by embedding the data in a more representative space. This overcomes obstacles surrounding the multitude of data types and attributes. It also makes the use of intuitive distance metrics possible for similarity measurements and as an attack vector. In a series of experiments with publicly available datasets, we compare the performances of similarity-based and attack-based methods, both with and without use of the contrastive learning-based embeddings. Our results show that relatively efficient, easy to implement privacy metrics can perform equally well as more advanced metrics explicitly modeling conditions for privacy referred to by the GDPR.

Small business owners (SBOs) often lack the resources and design experience needed to produce high-quality advertisements. To address this, we developed ACAI (AI Co-Creation for Advertising and Inspiration), an GenAI-powered multimodal advertisement creation tool, and conducted a user study with 16 SBOs in London to explore their perceptions of and interactions with ACAI in advertisement creation. Our findings reveal that structured inputs enhance user agency and control while improving AI outputs by facilitating better brand alignment, enhancing AI transparency, and offering scaffolding that assists novice designers, such as SBOs, in formulating prompts. We also found that ACAI's multimodal interface bridges the design skill gap for SBOs with a clear advertisement vision, but who lack the design jargon necessary for effective prompting. Building on our findings, we propose three capabilities: contextual intelligence, adaptive interactions, and data management, with corresponding design recommendations to advance the co-creative attributes of AI-mediated design tools.

Dynamic Treatment Regimes (DTRs) provide a systematic approach for making sequential treatment decisions that adapt to individual patient characteristics, particularly in clinical contexts where survival outcomes are of interest. Censoring-Aware Tree-Based Reinforcement Learning (CA-TRL) is a novel framework to address the complexities associated with censored data when estimating optimal DTRs. We explore ways to learn effective DTRs, from observational data. By enhancing traditional tree-based reinforcement learning methods with augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) and censoring-aware modifications, CA-TRL delivers robust and interpretable treatment strategies. We demonstrate its effectiveness through extensive simulations and real-world applications using the SANAD epilepsy dataset, where it outperformed the recently proposed ASCL method in key metrics such as restricted mean survival time (RMST) and decision-making accuracy. This work represents a step forward in advancing personalized and data-driven treatment strategies across diverse healthcare settings.

Malicious content generated by large language models (LLMs) can pose varying degrees of harm. Although existing LLM-based moderators can detect harmful content, they struggle to assess risk levels and may miss lower-risk outputs. Accurate risk assessment allows platforms with different safety thresholds to tailor content filtering and rejection. In this paper, we introduce per-topic severity rubrics for 11 harmful topics and build BingoGuard, an LLM-based moderation system designed to predict both binary safety labels and severity levels. To address the lack of annotations on levels of severity, we propose a scalable generate-then-filter framework that first generates responses across different severity levels and then filters out low-quality responses. Using this framework, we create BingoGuardTrain, a training dataset with 54,897 examples covering a variety of topics, response severity, styles, and BingoGuardTest, a test set with 988 examples explicitly labeled based on our severity rubrics that enables fine-grained analysis on model behaviors on different severity levels. Our BingoGuard-8B, trained on BingoGuardTrain, achieves the state-of-the-art performance on several moderation benchmarks, including WildGuardTest and HarmBench, as well as BingoGuardTest, outperforming best public models, WildGuard, by 4.3\%. Our analysis demonstrates that incorporating severity levels into training significantly enhances detection performance and enables the model to effectively gauge the severity of harmful responses.

Detecting toxic language including sexism, harassment and abusive behaviour, remains a critical challenge, particularly in its subtle and context-dependent forms. Existing approaches largely focus on isolated message-level classification, overlooking toxicity that emerges across conversational contexts. To promote and enable future research in this direction, we introduce SafeSpeech, a comprehensive platform for toxic content detection and analysis that bridges message-level and conversation-level insights. The platform integrates fine-tuned classifiers and large language models (LLMs) to enable multi-granularity detection, toxic-aware conversation summarization, and persona profiling. SafeSpeech also incorporates explainability mechanisms, such as perplexity gain analysis, to highlight the linguistic elements driving predictions. Evaluations on benchmark datasets, including EDOS, OffensEval, and HatEval, demonstrate the reproduction of state-of-the-art performance across multiple tasks, including fine-grained sexism detection.

Generative AI is frequently portrayed as revolutionary or even apocalyptic, prompting calls for novel regulatory approaches. This essay argues that such views are misguided. Instead, generative AI should be understood as an evolutionary step in the broader algorithmic media landscape, alongside search engines and social media. Like these platforms, generative AI centralizes information control, relies on complex algorithms to shape content, and extensively uses user data, thus perpetuating common problems: unchecked corporate power, echo chambers, and weakened traditional gatekeepers. Regulation should therefore share a consistent objective: ensuring media institutions remain trustworthy. Without trust, public discourse risks fragmenting into isolated communities dominated by comforting, tribal beliefs -- a threat intensified by generative AI's capacity to bypass gatekeepers and personalize truth. Current governance frameworks, such as the EU's AI Act and the US Executive Order 14110, emphasize reactive risk mitigation, addressing measurable threats like national security, public health, and algorithmic bias. While effective for novel technological risks, this reactive approach fails to adequately address broader issues of trust and legitimacy inherent to digital media. Proactive regulation fostering transparency, accountability, and public confidence is essential. Viewing generative AI exclusively as revolutionary risks repeating past regulatory failures that left social media and search engines insufficiently regulated. Instead, regulation must proactively shape an algorithmic media environment serving the public good, supporting quality information and robust civic discourse.

As machine learning systems become increasingly embedded in human society, their impact on the natural world continues to escalate. Technical evaluations have addressed a variety of potential harms from large language models (LLMs) towards humans and the environment, but there is little empirical work regarding harms towards nonhuman animals. Following the growing recognition of animal protection in regulatory and ethical AI frameworks, we present the Animal Harm Assessment (AHA), a novel evaluation of risks of animal harm in LLM-generated text. Our dataset comprises 1,850 curated questions from Reddit post titles and 2,500 synthetic questions based on 50 animal categories (e.g., cats, reptiles) and 50 ethical scenarios, with further 70-30 public-private split. Scenarios include open-ended questions about how to treat animals, practical scenarios with potential animal harm, and willingness-to-pay measures for the prevention of animal harm. Using the LLM-as-a-judge framework, answers are evaluated for their potential to increase or decrease harm, and evaluations are debiased for the tendency to judge their own outputs more favorably. We show that AHA produces meaningful evaluation results when applied to frontier LLMs, revealing significant differences between models, animal categories, scenarios, and subreddits. We conclude with future directions for technical research and the challenges of building evaluations on complex social and moral topics.

With the introduction of regulations related to the ``right to be forgotten", federated learning (FL) is facing new privacy compliance challenges. To address these challenges, researchers have proposed federated unlearning (FU). However, existing FU research has primarily focused on improving the efficiency of unlearning, with less attention paid to the potential privacy vulnerabilities inherent in these methods. To address this gap, we draw inspiration from gradient inversion attacks in FL and propose the federated unlearning inversion attack (FUIA). The FUIA is specifically designed for the three types of FU (sample unlearning, client unlearning, and class unlearning), aiming to provide a comprehensive analysis of the privacy leakage risks associated with FU. In FUIA, the server acts as an honest-but-curious attacker, recording and exploiting the model differences before and after unlearning to expose the features and labels of forgotten data. FUIA significantly leaks the privacy of forgotten data and can target all types of FU. This attack contradicts the goal of FU to eliminate specific data influence, instead exploiting its vulnerabilities to recover forgotten data and expose its privacy flaws. Extensive experimental results show that FUIA can effectively reveal the private information of forgotten data. To mitigate this privacy leakage, we also explore two potential defense methods, although these come at the cost of reduced unlearning effectiveness and the usability of the unlearned model.

Google will have to break up its business, the Justice Department said in a filing, upholding the previous administration's proposal after a federal judge ruled last year that the company illegally abused a monopoly over the search industry. As The Washington Post and The New York Times have reported, the Justice Department reiterated in a new filing that Google will have to sell the Chrome browser. When the DOJ argued for its sale last year, it said that selling Chrome "will permanently stop Google's control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the internet." The Justice Department also kept a Biden-era proposal that seeks to ban Google from paying companies like Apple, other smartphone manufacturers and Mozilla to make its search engine the default on their phones and browsers. It did remove a previous proposal that would compel Google to sell its stakes in AI startups, however, after Anthropic told the government that it needs the company's money to continue operating. Instead of banning AI investments altogether, the government wants to require the company to notify federal and state officials before making investments in artificial intelligence.