This study investigates how cultural proximity affects the ability to detect AI-generated fake news by comparing South African participants with those from other nationalities. As large language models increasingly enable the creation of sophisticated fake news, understanding human detection capabilities becomes crucial, particularly across different cultural contexts. We conducted a survey where 89 participants (56 South Africans, 33 from other nationalities) evaluated 10 true South African news articles and 10 AI-generated fake versions. Results reveal an asymmetric pattern: South Africans demonstrated superior performance in detecting true news about their country (40% deviation from ideal rating) compared to other participants (52%), but performed worse at identifying fake news (62% vs. 55%). This difference may reflect South Africans' higher overall trust in news sources. Our analysis further shows that South Africans relied more on content knowledge and contextual understanding when judging credibility, while participants from other countries emphasised formal linguistic features such as grammar and structure. Overall, the deviation from ideal rating was similar between groups (51% vs. 53%), suggesting that cultural familiarity appears to aid verification of authentic information but may also introduce bias when evaluating fabricated content. These insights contribute to understanding cross-cultural dimensions of misinformation detection and inform strategies for combating AI-generated fake news in increasingly globalised information ecosystems where content crosses cultural and geographical boundaries.

In recent times, discussions on social media platforms have increasingly come under scrutiny due to the proliferation of science denial and fake news. Traditional solutions, such as regulatory actions, have been implemented to mitigate the spread of misinformation; however, these measures alone are not sufficient. To complement these efforts, educational approaches are becoming essential in empowering users to critically engage with misinformation. Conversation training, through serious games or personalized methods, has emerged as a promising strategy to help users handle science denial and toxic conversation tactics. This paper suggests an interdisciplinary seminar to explore the suitability of Large Language Models (LLMs) acting as a persona of a science denier to support people in identifying misinformation and improving resilience against toxic interactions. In the seminar, groups of four to five students will develop an AI-based chatbot that enables realistic interactions with science-denial argumentation structures. The task involves planning the setting, integrating a Large Language Model to facilitate natural dialogues, implementing the chatbot using the RASA framework, and evaluating the outcomes in a user study. It is crucial that users understand what they need to do during the interaction, how to conclude it, and how the relevant information is conveyed. The seminar does not aim to develop chatbots for practicing debunking but serves to teach AI technologies and test the feasibility of this idea for future applications. The chatbot seminar is conducted as a hybrid, parallel master's module at the participating educational institutions.

Abstract--In the past two decades, open access to news and information has increased rapidly, empowering educated political growth within democratic societies. News recommender systems (NRSs) have shown to be useful in this process, minimizing political disengagement and information overload by providing individuals with articles on topics that matter to them. Unfortunately, NRSs often conflate underlying user interest with the partisan bias of the articles in their reading history and with the most popular biases present in the coverage of their favored topics. Over extended interaction, this can result in the formation of filter bubbles and the polarization of user partisanship. In this paper, we propose a novel embedding space called Constructed Political Coordinates (CPC), which models the political partisanship of users over a given topic-space, relative to a larger sample population. We apply a simple collaborative filtering (CF) framework using CPC-based correlation to recommend articles sourced from oppositional users, who have different biases from the user in question. We compare against classical CF methods and find that CPC-based methods promote pointed bias diversity and better match the true political tolerance of users, while classical methods implicitly exploit biases to maximize interaction. Recommender system (RS) utility has two main value measurements: users seeing content that they engage positively with, and the content providers maximizing engagement with their content or platform. While the two are evidently correlated (i.e. a user who is not properly catered to will likely cease to use the platform), the latter provides motivation for recommendation algorithms to shift a user's preferences to make them easier to cater to, resulting in higher expectations of long-term engagement [1]. Previous research [2] on the relationship between recom-mender systems and American political typology suggests that users with more extreme political preferences exhibit higher engagement metrics with their recommended news. Additionally, it was found that their engagement can be maximized by recommending articles among which a dominant percentage express a singular partisan bias. This establishes an implicit incentive for a News Recommender System (NRS) to shift user preferences toward political extremes through selection bias, particularly in long-term value systems or those leveraging popularity [1]. This phenomenon results in the formation of filter bubbles, where users are eventually shown only perspectives in their news which comply with their preexisting opinions, and users with heterogeneous partisanship over distinct topics have their political ideology homogenized over time.

When large language models (LLMs) are aligned to a specific online community, do they exhibit generalizable behavioral patterns that mirror that community's attitudes and responses to new uncertainty, or are they simply recalling patterns from training data? We introduce a framework to test epistemic stance transfer: targeted deletion of event knowledge, validated with multiple probes, followed by evaluation of whether models still reproduce the community's organic response patterns under ignorance. Using Russian--Ukrainian military discourse and U.S. partisan Twitter data, we find that even after aggressive fact removal, aligned LLMs maintain stable, community-specific behavioral patterns for handling uncertainty. These results provide evidence that alignment encodes structured, generalizable behaviors beyond surface mimicry. Our framework offers a systematic way to detect behavioral biases that persist under ignorance, advancing efforts toward safer and more transparent LLM deployments.

These proceedings include the Late-Breaking Abstracts accepted for the Evo* 2025 Conference, hosted in Trieste (Italy), from April 23th to 25th. These extended abstracts were presented through short talks at the conference, providing an overview of ongoing research and initial results on the application of diverse Evolutionary Computation strategies and other Nature-Inspired methodologies to practical problem domains. Collectively, these contributions point to encouraging directions for future work, underscoring the potential of nature-inspired approaches-- especially Evolutionary Algorithms -- for advancing research and enabling new applications.

By observing the activities and relationships of musicians and sound designers to the activities of creation, performance, publishing and dissemination with artificial intelligence (AI), from two specialized forums between 2022 and 2024, this article proposes a lexicometric analysis of the representations linked to their use. Indeed, the machine, now equipped with artificial intelligences requiring new appropriations and enabling new mediations, constitutes new challenges for artists. To study these confrontations and new mediations, our approach mobilizes the theoretical framework of the Human-AI Musicking Framework, based on a lexicometric analysis of content. The aim is to clarify the present and future uses of AI from the interfaces, in the creation of sound and musical content, and to identify the obstacles, obstacles, brakes and limits to appropriation ``in the fact of making the content one's own and integrating it as a part of oneself'' (Bachimont and Crozat, 2004) in the context of a collaboration between musician and machine.

Evaluating cross-lingual knowledge transfer in large language models is challenging, as correct answers in a target language may arise either from genuine transfer or from prior exposure during pre-training. We present LiveCLKTBench, an automated generation pipeline specifically designed to isolate and measure cross-lingual knowledge transfer. Our pipeline identifies self-contained, time-sensitive knowledge entities from real-world domains, filters them based on temporal occurrence, and verifies them against the model's knowledge. The documents of these valid entities are then used to generate factual questions, which are translated into multiple languages to evaluate transferability across linguistic boundaries. Using LiveCLKTBench, we evaluate several LLMs across five languages and observe that cross-lingual transfer is strongly influenced by linguistic distance and often asymmetric across language directions. While larger models improve transfer, the gains diminish with scale and vary across domains. These findings provide new insights into multilingual transfer and demonstrate the value of LiveCLKTBench as a reliable benchmark for future research.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used in real world applications, yet their safety under adversarial conditions remains underexplored. This study evaluates the harmlessness of four leading MLLMs (GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3.5, Pixtral 12B, and Qwen VL Plus) when exposed to adversarial prompts across text-only and multimodal formats. A team of 26 red teamers generated 726 prompts targeting three harm categories: illegal activity, disinformation, and unethical behaviour. These prompts were submitted to each model, and 17 annotators rated 2,904 model outputs for harmfulness using a 5-point scale. Results show significant differences in vulnerability across models and modalities. Pixtral 12B exhibited the highest rate of harmful responses (~62%), while Claude Sonnet 3.5 was the most resistant (~10%). Contrary to expectations, text-only prompts were slightly more effective at bypassing safety mechanisms than multimodal ones. Statistical analysis confirmed that both model type and input modality were significant predictors of harmfulness. These findings underscore the urgent need for robust, multimodal safety benchmarks as MLLMs are deployed more widely.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order launching the "Genesis Mission" to accelerate AI use for scientific discovery through public-private collaboration.

Certified holistic nutritionist Robin DeCicco explains how pumpkin's antioxidants and carotenoids help protect against cell damage and reduce inflammatory conditions.