Canceling is a morally-driven phenomenon that hinders the development of safe social media platforms and contributes to ideological polarization. To address this issue we present the Canceling Attitudes Detection (CADE) dataset, an annotated corpus of canceling incidents aimed at exploring the factors of disagreements in evaluating people canceling attitudes on social media. Specifically, we study the impact of annotators' morality in their perception of canceling, showing that morality is an independent axis for the explanation of disagreement on this phenomenon. Annotator's judgments heavily depend on the type of controversial events and involved celebrities. This shows the need to develop more event-centric datasets to better understand how harms are perpetrated in social media and to develop more aware technologies for their detection.

Per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), chemicals found in products like non-stick cookware, are unfortunately persistent environmental pollutants with severe health risks. Accurately mapping PFAS contamination is crucial for guiding targeted remediation efforts and protecting public and environmental health, yet detection across large regions remains challenging due to the cost of testing and the difficulty of simulating their spread. In this work, we introduce FOCUS, a geospatial deep learning framework with a label noise-aware loss function, to predict PFAS contamination in surface water over large regions. By integrating hydrological flow data, land cover information, and proximity to known PFAS sources, our approach leverages both spatial and environmental context to improve prediction accuracy. We evaluate the performance of our approach through extensive ablation studies and comparative analyses against baselines like sparse segmentation, as well as existing scientific methods, including Kriging and pollutant transport simulations. Results highlight our framework's potential for scalable PFAS monitoring.

Decades of research in machine learning have given us powerful tools for making accurate predictions. But when used in social settings and on human inputs, better accuracy does not immediately translate to better social outcomes. This may not be surprising given that conventional learning frameworks are not designed to express societal preferences -- let alone promote them. This position paper argues that machine learning is currently missing, and can gain much from incorporating, a proper notion of social welfare. The field of welfare economics asks: how should we allocate limited resources to self-interested agents in a way that maximizes social benefit? We argue that this perspective applies to many modern applications of machine learning in social contexts, and advocate for its adoption. Rather than disposing of prediction, we aim to leverage this forte of machine learning for promoting social welfare. We demonstrate this idea by proposing a conceptual framework that gradually transitions from accuracy maximization (with awareness to welfare) to welfare maximization (via accurate prediction). We detail applications and use-cases for which our framework can be effective, identify technical challenges and practical opportunities, and highlight future avenues worth pursuing.

We propose a novel paradigm for automatic fact-checking that leverages frame semantics to enhance the structured understanding of claims and guide the process of fact-checking them. To support this, we introduce a pilot dataset of real-world claims extracted from PolitiFact, specifically annotated for large-scale structured data. This dataset underpins two case studies: the first investigates voting-related claims using the Vote semantic frame, while the second explores various semantic frames based on data sources from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Our findings demonstrate the effectiveness of frame semantics in improving evidence retrieval and explainability for fact-checking. Finally, we conducted a survey of frames evoked in fact-checked claims, identifying high-impact frames to guide future work in this direction.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) based on human preferences, commonly achieved through reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), has been effective in improving their performance. However, maintaining LLM safety throughout the fine-tuning process remains a significant challenge, as resolving conflicts between safety and helpfulness can be non-trivial. Typically, the safety alignment of LLM is trained on data with safety-related categories. However, our experiments find that naively increasing the scale of safety training data usually leads the LLMs to an ``overly safe'' state rather than a ``truly safe'' state, boosting the refusal rate through extensive safety-aligned data without genuinely understanding the requirements for safe responses. Such an approach can inadvertently diminish the models' helpfulness. To understand the phenomenon, we first investigate the role of safety data by categorizing them into three different groups, and observe that each group behaves differently as training data scales up. To boost the balance between safety and helpfulness, we propose an Equilibrate RLHF framework including a Fine-grained Data-centric (FDC) approach that achieves better safety alignment even with fewer training data, and an Adaptive Message-wise Alignment (AMA) approach, which selectively highlight the key segments through a gradient masking strategy. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly enhances the safety alignment of LLMs while balancing safety and helpfulness.

This paper is a collaborative effort between Linguistics, Law, and Computer Science to evaluate stereotypes and biases in automated translation systems. We advocate gender-neutral translation as a means to promote gender inclusion and improve the objectivity of machine translation. Our approach focuses on identifying gender bias in English-to-Italian translations. First, we define gender bias following human rights law and linguistics literature. Then we proceed by identifying gender-specific terms such as she/lei and he/lui as key elements. We then evaluate the cosine similarity between these target terms and others in the dataset to reveal the model's perception of semantic relations. Using numerical features, we effectively evaluate the intensity and direction of the bias. Our findings provide tangible insights for developing and training gender-neutral translation algorithms.

Alignment tuning is crucial for ensuring large language models (LLMs) behave ethically and helpfully. Current alignment approaches require high-quality annotations and significant training resources. This paper proposes a low-cost, tuning-free method using in-context learning (ICL) to enhance LLM alignment. Through an analysis of high-quality ICL demos, we identified style as a key factor influencing LLM alignment capabilities and explicitly restyled ICL exemplars based on this stylistic framework. Additionally, we combined the restyled demos to achieve a balance between the two conflicting aspects of LLM alignment--factuality and safety. We packaged the restyled examples as prompts to trigger few-shot learning, improving LLM alignment. Compared to the best baseline approach, with an average score of 5.00 as the maximum, our method achieves a maximum 0.10 increase on the Alpaca task (from 4.50 to 4.60), a 0.22 enhancement on the Just-eval benchmark (from 4.34 to 4.56), and a maximum improvement of 0.32 (from 3.53 to 3.85) on the MT-Bench dataset. We release the code and data at https://github.com/AnonymousCode-ComputerScience/RIDE.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as conversational agents, exploiting their capabilities in various sectors such as education, law, medicine, and more. However, LLMs are often subjected to context-shifting behaviour, resulting in a lack of consistent and interpretable personality-aligned interactions. Adherence to psychological traits lacks comprehensive analysis, especially in the case of dyadic (pairwise) conversations. We examine this challenge from two viewpoints, initially using two conversation agents to generate a discourse on a certain topic with an assigned personality from the OCEAN framework (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) as High/Low for each trait. This is followed by using multiple judge agents to infer the original traits assigned to explore prediction consistency, inter-model agreement, and alignment with the assigned personality. Our findings indicate that while LLMs can be guided toward personality-driven dialogue, their ability to maintain personality traits varies significantly depending on the combination of models and discourse settings. These inconsistencies emphasise the challenges in achieving stable and interpretable personality-aligned interactions in LLMs.

Air quality prediction is key to mitigating health impacts and guiding decisions, yet existing models tend to focus on temporal trends while overlooking spatial generalization. We propose AQ-Net, a spatiotemporal reanalysis model for both observed and unobserved stations in the near future. AQ-Net utilizes the LSTM and multi-head attention for the temporal regression. We also propose a cyclic encoding technique to ensure continuous time representation. To learn fine-grained spatial air quality estimation, we incorporate AQ-Net with the neural kNN to explore feature-based interpolation, such that we can fill the spatial gaps given coarse observation stations. To demonstrate the efficiency of our model for spatiotemporal reanalysis, we use data from 2013-2017 collected in northern China for PM2.5 analysis. Extensive experiments show that AQ-Net excels in air quality reanalysis, highlighting the potential of hybrid spatio-temporal models to better capture environmental dynamics, especially in urban areas where both spatial and temporal variability are critical.

Neural scaling laws have revolutionized the design and optimization of large-scale AI models by revealing predictable relationships between model size, dataset volume, and computational resources. Early research established power-law relationships in model performance, leading to compute-optimal scaling strategies. However, recent studies highlighted their limitations across architectures, modalities, and deployment contexts. Sparse models, mixture-of-experts, retrieval-augmented learning, and multimodal models often deviate from traditional scaling patterns. Moreover, scaling behaviors vary across domains such as vision, reinforcement learning, and fine-tuning, underscoring the need for more nuanced approaches. In this survey, we synthesize insights from over 50 studies, examining the theoretical foundations, empirical findings, and practical implications of scaling laws. We also explore key challenges, including data efficiency, inference scaling, and architecture-specific constraints, advocating for adaptive scaling strategies tailored to real-world applications. We suggest that while scaling laws provide a useful guide, they do not always generalize across all architectures and training strategies.