To establish Lemmas 3.1 and 3.3, we build on the work of ( We recall the following notation from the main body of the paper. Lemma 3.1 is based on the construction of certain geometric partitions of A high-level idea behind the proof is explained in Figure 1. We now provide formal proof. Now we will prove that f satisfies the required properties. First, we prove the approximation guarantee.

Moral values have deep roots in early civilizations, codified within norms and laws that regulated societal order and the common good. They play a crucial role in understanding the psychological basis of human behavior and cultural orientation. The Moral Foundation Theory (MFT) is a well-established framework that identifies the core moral foundations underlying the manner in which different cultures shape individual and social lives. Recent advancements in natural language processing, particularly Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs), have enabled the extraction and analysis of moral dimensions from textual data. This survey presents a comprehensive review of MFT-informed PLMs, providing an analysis of moral tendencies in PLMs and their application in the context of the MFT. We also review relevant datasets and lexicons and discuss trends, limitations, and future directions. By providing a structured overview of the intersection between PLMs and MFT, this work bridges moral psychology insights within the realm of PLMs, paving the way for further research and development in creating morally aware AI systems.

The widespread use of social media has led to a surge in popularity for automated methods of analyzing public opinion. Supervised methods are adept at text categorization, yet the dynamic nature of social media discussions poses a continual challenge for these techniques due to the constant shifting of the focus. On the other hand, traditional unsupervised methods for extracting themes from public discourse, such as topic modeling, often reveal overarching patterns that might not capture specific nuances. Consequently, a significant portion of research into social media discourse still depends on labor-intensive manual coding techniques and a human-in-the-loop approach, which are both time-consuming and costly. In this work, we study the problem of discovering arguments associated with a specific theme. We propose a generic LLMs-in-the-Loop strategy that leverages the advanced capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract latent arguments from social media messaging. To demonstrate our approach, we apply our framework to contentious topics. We use two publicly available datasets: (1) the climate campaigns dataset of 14k Facebook ads with 25 themes and (2) the COVID-19 vaccine campaigns dataset of 9k Facebook ads with 14 themes. Additionally, we design a downstream task as stance prediction by leveraging talking points in climate debates. Furthermore, we analyze demographic targeting and the adaptation of messaging based on real-world events.

The mainstream media has much leeway in what it chooses to cover and how it covers it. These choices have real-world consequences on what people know and their subsequent behaviors. However, the lack of objective measures to evaluate editorial choices makes research in this area particularly difficult. In this paper, we argue that there are newsworthy topics where objective measures exist in the form of supporting data and propose a computational framework to analyze editorial choices in this setup. We focus on the economy because the reporting of economic indicators presents us with a relatively easy way to determine both the selection and framing of various publications. Their values provide a ground truth of how the economy is doing relative to how the publications choose to cover it. To do this, we define frame prediction as a set of interdependent tasks. At the article level, we learn to identify the reported stance towards the general state of the economy. Then, for every numerical quantity reported in the article, we learn to identify whether it corresponds to an economic indicator and whether it is being reported in a positive or negative way. To perform our analysis, we track six American publishers and each article that appeared in the top 10 slots of their landing page between 2015 and 2023.

Social media discourse from US politicians frequently consists of 'seemingly similar language used by opposing sides of the political spectrum'. But often, it translates to starkly contrasting real-world actions. For instance, "We need to keep our students safe from mass shootings" may signal either "arming teachers to stop the shooter" or "banning guns to reduce mass shootings" depending on who says it and their political stance on the issue. In this paper, we define and characterize the context that is required to fully understand such ambiguous statements in a computational setting and ground them in real-world entities, actions, and attitudes. To that end, we propose two challenging datasets that require an understanding of the real-world context of the text to be solved effectively. We benchmark these datasets against baselines built upon large pre-trained models such as BERT, RoBERTa, GPT-3, etc. Additionally, we develop and benchmark more structured baselines building upon existing 'Discourse Contextualization Framework' and 'Political Actor Representation' models. We perform analysis of the datasets and baseline predictions to obtain further insights into the pragmatic language understanding challenges posed by the proposed social grounding tasks.

Social media has become a major driver of social change, by facilitating the formation of online social movements. Automatically understanding the perspectives driving the movement and the voices opposing it, is a challenging task as annotated data is difficult to obtain. We propose a weakly supervised graph-based approach that explicitly models perspectives in #BackLivesMatter-related tweets. Our proposed approach utilizes a social-linguistic representation of the data. We convert the text to a graph by breaking it into structured elements and connect it with the social network of authors, then structured prediction is done over the elements for identifying perspectives. Our approach uses a small seed set of labeled examples. We experiment with large language models for generating artificial training examples, compare them to manual annotation, and find that it achieves comparable performance. We perform quantitative and qualitative analyses using a human-annotated test set. Our model outperforms multitask baselines by a large margin, successfully characterizing the perspectives supporting and opposing #BLM.

David Gruber began his almost impossibly varied career studying bluestriped grunt fish off the coast of Belize. He was an undergraduate, and his job was to track the fish at night. He navigated by the stars and slept in a tent on the beach. "It was a dream," he recalled recently. "I didn't know what I was doing, but I was performing what I thought a marine biologist would do."

Many approaches to Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks often treat them as single-step problems, where an agent receives an instruction, executes it, and is evaluated based on the final outcome. However, human language is inherently interactive, as evidenced by the back-and-forth nature of human conversations. In light of this, we posit that human-AI collaboration should also be interactive, with humans monitoring the work of AI agents and providing feedback that the agent can understand and utilize. Further, the AI agent should be able to detect when it needs additional information and proactively ask for help. Enabling this scenario would lead to more natural, efficient, and engaging human-AI collaborations. In this work, we explore these directions using the challenging task defined by the IGLU competition, an interactive grounded language understanding task in a MineCraft-like world. We explore multiple types of help players can give to the AI to guide it and analyze the impact of this help in AI behavior, resulting in performance improvements.

Modeling the ideological perspectives of political actors is an essential task in computational political science with applications in many downstream tasks. Existing approaches are generally limited to textual data and voting records, while they neglect the rich social context and valuable expert knowledge for holistic ideological analysis. In this paper, we propose \textbf{PAR}, a \textbf{P}olitical \textbf{A}ctor \textbf{R}epresentation learning framework that jointly leverages social context and expert knowledge. Specifically, we retrieve and extract factual statements about legislators to leverage social context information. We then construct a heterogeneous information network to incorporate social context and use relational graph neural networks to learn legislator representations. Finally, we train PAR with three objectives to align representation learning with expert knowledge, model ideological stance consistency, and simulate the echo chamber phenomenon. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PAR is better at augmenting political text understanding and successfully advances the state-of-the-art in political perspective detection and roll call vote prediction. Further analysis proves that PAR learns representations that reflect the political reality and provide new insights into political behavior.