Text classification is an important topic in the field of natural language processing. It has been preliminarily applied in information retrieval, digital library, automatic abstracting, text filtering, word semantic discrimination and many other fields. The aim of this research is to use a variety of algorithms to test the ability to identify offensive posts and evaluate their performance against a variety of assessment methods. The motivation for this project is to reduce the harm of these languages to human censors by automating the screening of offending posts. The field is a new one, and despite much interest in the past two years, there has been no focus on the object of the offence. Through the experiment of this project, it should inspire future research on identification methods as well as identification content.

We consider the critical issue of false negatives in Vision-Language Pre-training (VLP), a challenge that arises from the inherent many-to-many correspondence of image-text pairs in large-scale web-crawled datasets. The presence of false negatives can impede achieving optimal performance and even lead to learning failures. To address this challenge, we propose a method called COSMO (COnverting and SMOoothing false negatives) that manages the false negative issues, especially powerful in hard negative sampling. Building upon the recently developed GRouped mIni-baTch sampling (GRIT) strategy, our approach consists of two pivotal components: 1) an efficient connection mining process that identifies and converts false negatives into positives, and 2) label smoothing for the image-text contrastive loss (ITC). Our comprehensive experiments verify the effectiveness of COSMO across multiple downstream tasks, emphasizing the crucial role of addressing false negatives in VLP, potentially even surpassing the importance of addressing false positives. In addition, the compatibility of COSMO with the recent BLIP-family model is also demonstrated.

One of the motivations for explainable AI is to allow humans to make better and more informed decisions regarding the use and deployment of AI models. But careful evaluations are needed to assess whether this expectation has been fulfilled. Current evaluations mainly focus on algorithmic properties of explanations, and those that involve human subjects often employ subjective questions to test human's perception of explanation usefulness, without being grounded in objective metrics and measurements. In this work, we evaluate whether explanations can improve human decision-making in practical scenarios of machine learning model development. We conduct a mixed-methods user study involving image data to evaluate saliency maps generated by SmoothGrad, GradCAM, and an oracle explanation on two tasks: model selection and counterfactual simulation. To our surprise, we did not find evidence of significant improvement on these tasks when users were provided with any of the saliency maps, even the synthetic oracle explanation designed to be simple to understand and highly indicative of the answer. Nonetheless, explanations did help users more accurately describe the models. These findings suggest caution regarding the usefulness and potential for misunderstanding in saliency-based explanations.

AI-generated media has become a threat to our digital society as we know it. These forgeries can be created automatically and on a large scale based on publicly available technology. Recognizing this challenge, academics and practitioners have proposed a multitude of automatic detection strategies to detect such artificial media. However, in contrast to these technical advances, the human perception of generated media has not been thoroughly studied yet. In this paper, we aim at closing this research gap. We perform the first comprehensive survey into people's ability to detect generated media, spanning three countries (USA, Germany, and China) with 3,002 participants across audio, image, and text media. Our results indicate that state-of-the-art forgeries are almost indistinguishable from "real" media, with the majority of participants simply guessing when asked to rate them as human- or machine-generated. In addition, AI-generated media receive is voted more human like across all media types and all countries. To further understand which factors influence people's ability to detect generated media, we include personal variables, chosen based on a literature review in the domains of deepfake and fake news research. In a regression analysis, we found that generalized trust, cognitive reflection, and self-reported familiarity with deepfakes significantly influence participant's decision across all media categories.

This paper focuses on parameter selection issues of kernel ridge regression (KRR). Due to special spectral properties of KRR, we find that delicate subdivision of the parameter interval shrinks the difference between two successive KRR estimates. Based on this observation, we develop an early-stopping type parameter selection strategy for KRR according to the so-called Lepskii-type principle. Theoretical verifications are presented in the framework of learning theory to show that KRR equipped with the proposed parameter selection strategy succeeds in achieving optimal learning rates and adapts to different norms, providing a new record of parameter selection for kernel methods.

In foreign exchange (FX), as in other asset classes, broker-client relationships are ubiquitous. The broker streams bid and ask quotes to her clients and the clients decide when to trade on these quotes, so the broker bears the risk of adverse selection when trading with better informed clients. These risks are borne by both liquidity providers who stream quotes to individual parties and by market participants who provide liquidity in the books of electronic exchanges. However, in contrast to electronic order books in which trading is anonymous for all participants (e.g., in Nasdaq, LSE, Euronext), in broker-client relationships the broker knows which client executed the order. This privileged information can be used by the broker to classify flow, i.e., toxic or benign, and to devise strategies that mitigate adverse selection costs. In the literature, models generally classify traders as informed or uninformed; see e.g., Bagehot (1971), Copeland and Galai (1983), Grossman and Stiglitz (1980), Amihud and Mendelson (1980), Kyle (1989), Kyle (1985), and Glosten and Milgrom (1985). In equity markets, many studies focus on informed flow (i.e., asymmetry of information) across various traded stocks, see e.g., Easley et al. (1996) who study the probability of informed trading at the stock level, while our study focuses on We thank Andrew Stewart, Alistair Sturgiss, Fayçal Drissi, Patrick Chang, Álvaro Arroyo, Sergio Calvo Ordoñez, and participants at the Oxford Victoria Seminar for comments. ChatGPT suggested the name PULSE for our algorithm.

Automated classifiers (ACs), often built via supervised machine learning (SML), can categorize large, statistically powerful samples of data ranging from text to images and video, and have become widely popular measurement devices in communication science and related fields. Despite this popularity, even highly accurate classifiers make errors that cause misclassification bias and misleading results in downstream analyses-unless such analyses account for these errors. As we show in a systematic literature review of SML applications, communication scholars largely ignore misclassification bias. In principle, existing statistical methods can use "gold standard" validation data, such as that created by human annotators, to correct misclassification bias and produce consistent estimates. We introduce and test such methods, including a new method we design and implement in the R package misclassificationmodels, via Monte Carlo simulations designed to reveal each method's limitations, which we also release. Based on our results, we recommend our new error correction method as it is versatile and efficient. In sum, automated classifiers, even those below common accuracy standards or making systematic misclassifications, can be useful for measurement with careful study design and appropriate error correction methods.

In this paper, we consider a theoretical model for injecting data bias, namely, under-representation and label bias (Blum & Stangl, 2019). We empirically study the effect of varying data biases on the accuracy and fairness of fair classifiers. Through extensive experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets (e.g., Adult, German Credit, Bank Marketing, COMPAS), we empirically audit pre-, in-, and post-processing fair classifiers from standard fairness toolkits for their fairness and accuracy by injecting varying amounts of under-representation and label bias in their training data (but not the test data). Our main observations are: 1. The fairness and accuracy of many standard fair classifiers degrade severely as the bias injected in their training data increases, 2. A simple logistic regression model trained on the right data can often outperform, in both accuracy and fairness, most fair classifiers trained on biased training data, and 3. A few, simple fairness techniques (e.g., reweighing, exponentiated gradients) seem to offer stable accuracy and fairness guarantees even when their training data is injected with under-representation and label bias. Our experiments also show how to integrate a measure of data bias risk in the existing fairness dashboards for real-world deployments.

We study the problem of post-processing a supervised machine-learned regressor to maximize fair binary classification at all decision thresholds. By decreasing the statistical distance between each group's score distributions, we show that we can increase fair performance across all thresholds at once, and that we can do so without a large decrease in accuracy. To this end, we introduce a formal measure of Distributional Parity, which captures the degree of similarity in the distributions of classifications for different protected groups. Our main result is to put forward a novel post-processing algorithm based on optimal transport, which provably maximizes Distributional Parity, thereby attaining common notions of group fairness like Equalized Odds or Equal Opportunity at all thresholds. We demonstrate on two fairness benchmarks that our technique works well empirically, while also outperforming and generalizing similar techniques from related work.

Real-world datasets often exhibit imbalanced data distribution, where certain class levels are severely underrepresented. In such cases, traditional pattern classifiers have shown a bias towards the majority class, impeding accurate predictions for the minority class. This paper introduces an imbalanced data-oriented approach using probabilistic neural networks (PNNs) with a skew normal probability kernel to address this major challenge. PNNs are known for providing probabilistic outputs, enabling quantification of prediction confidence and uncertainty handling. By leveraging the skew normal distribution, which offers increased flexibility, particularly for imbalanced and non-symmetric data, our proposed Skew Probabilistic Neural Networks (SkewPNNs) can better represent underlying class densities. To optimize the performance of the proposed approach on imbalanced datasets, hyperparameter fine-tuning is imperative. To this end, we employ a population-based heuristic algorithm, Bat optimization algorithms, for effectively exploring the hyperparameter space. We also prove the statistical consistency of the density estimates which suggests that the true distribution will be approached smoothly as the sample size increases. Experimental simulations have been conducted on different synthetic datasets, comparing various benchmark-imbalanced learners. Our real-data analysis shows that SkewPNNs substantially outperform state-of-the-art machine learning methods for both balanced and imbalanced datasets in most experimental settings.