Measuring algorithmically infused societies.

It has been the historic responsibility of the social sciences to investigate human societies. Fulfilling this responsibility requires social theories, measurement models and social data. Most existing theories and measurement models in the social sciences were not developed with the deep societal reach of algorithms in mind. The emergence of 'algorithmically infused societies'-societies whose very fabric is co-shaped by algorithmic and human behaviour-raises three key challenges: the insufficient quality of measurements, the complex consequences of (mis)measurements, and the limits of existing social theories. Here we argue that tackling these challenges requires new social theories that account for the impact of algorithmic systems on social realities. To develop such theories, we need new methodologies for integrating data and measurements into theory construction. Given the scale at which measurements can be applied, we believe measurement models should be trustworthy, auditable and just. To achieve this, the development of measurements should be transparent and participatory, and include mechanisms to ensure measurement quality and identify possible harms. We argue that computational social scientists should rethink what aspects of algorithmically infused societies should be measured, how they should be measured, and the consequences of doing so.

Discovering beaten paths in collaborative ontology-engineering projects using Markov chains.

Biomedical taxonomies, thesauri and ontologies in the form of the International Classification of Diseases as a taxonomy or the National Cancer Institute Thesaurus as an OWL-based ontology, play a critical role in acquiring, representing and processing information about human health. With increasing adoption and relevance, biomedical ontologies have also significantly increased in size. For example, the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases, which is currently under active development by the World Health Organization contains nearly 50,000 classes representing a vast variety of different diseases and causes of death. This evolution in terms of size was accompanied by an evolution in the way ontologies are engineered. Because no single individual has the expertise to develop such large-scale ontologies, ontology-engineering projects have evolved from small-scale efforts involving just a few domain experts to large-scale projects that require effective collaboration between dozens or even hundreds of experts, practitioners and other stakeholders. Understanding the way these different stakeholders collaborate will enable us to improve editing environments that support such collaborations. In this paper, we uncover how large ontology-engineering projects, such as the International Classification of Diseases in its 11th revision, unfold by analyzing usage logs of five different biomedical ontology-engineering projects of varying sizes and scopes using Markov chains. We discover intriguing interaction patterns (e.g., which properties users frequently change after specific given ones) that suggest that large collaborative ontology-engineering projects are governed by a few general principles that determine and drive development. From our analysis, we identify commonalities and differences between different projects that have implications for project managers, ontology editors, developers and contributors working on collaborative ontology-engineering projects and tools in the biomedical domain.

AI Psychometrics: Assessing the Psychological Profiles of Large Language Models Through Psychometric Inventories.

We illustrate how standard psychometric inventories originally designed for assessing noncognitive human traits can be repurposed as diagnostic tools to evaluate analogous traits in large language models (LLMs). We start from the assumption that LLMs, inadvertently yet inevitably, acquire psychological traits (metaphorically speaking) from the vast text corpora on which they are trained. Such corpora contain sediments of the personalities, values, beliefs, and biases of the countless human authors of these texts, which LLMs learn through a complex training process. The traits that LLMs acquire in such a way can potentially influence their behavior, that is, their outputs in downstream tasks and applications in which they are employed, which in turn may have real-world consequences for individuals and social groups. By eliciting LLMs' responses to language-based psychometric inventories, we can bring their traits to light. Psychometric profiling enables researchers to study and compare LLMs in terms of noncognitive characteristics, thereby providing a window into the personalities, values, beliefs, and biases these models exhibit (or mimic). We discuss the history of similar ideas and outline possible psychometric approaches for LLMs. We demonstrate one promising approach, zero-shot classification, for several LLMs and psychometric inventories. We conclude by highlighting open challenges and future avenues of research for AI Psychometrics.

How Ontologies are Made: Studying the Hidden Social Dynamics Behind Collaborative Ontology Engineering Projects.

Traditionally, evaluation methods in the field of semantic technologies have focused on the end result of ontology engineering efforts, mainly, on evaluating ontologies and their corresponding qualities and characteristics. This focus has led to the development of a whole arsenal of ontology-evaluation techniques that investigate the quality of ontologies as a product. In this paper, we aim to shed light on the process of ontology engineering construction by introducing and applying a set of measures to analyze hidden social dynamics. We argue that especially for ontologies which are constructed collaboratively, understanding the social processes that have led to its construction is critical not only in understanding but consequently also in evaluating the ontology. With the work presented in this paper, we aim to expose the texture of collaborative ontology engineering processes that is otherwise left invisible. Using historical change-log data, we unveil qualitative differences and commonalities between different collaborative ontology engineering projects. Explaining and understanding these differences will help us to better comprehend the role and importance of social factors in collaborative ontology engineering projects. We hope that our analysis will spur a new line of evaluation techniques that view ontologies not as the static result of deliberations among domain experts, but as a dynamic, collaborative and iterative process that needs to be understood, evaluated and managed in itself. We believe that advances in this direction would help our community to expand the existing arsenal of ontology evaluation techniques towards more holistic approaches.

Toxic comments are associated with reduced activity of volunteer editors on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is one of the most successful collaborative projects in history. It is the largest encyclopedia ever created, with millions of users worldwide relying on it as the first source of information as well as for fact-checking and in-depth research. As Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of its volunteer editors, its success might be particularly affected by toxic speech. In this paper, we analyze all 57 million comments made on user talk pages of 8.5 million editors across the six most active language editions of Wikipedia to study the potential impact of toxicity on editors' behavior. We find that toxic comments are consistently associated with reduced activity of editors, equivalent to 0.5-2 active days per user in the short term. This translates to multiple human-years of lost productivity, considering the number of active contributors to Wikipedia. The effects of toxic comments are potentially even greater in the long term, as they are associated with a significantly increased risk of editors leaving the project altogether. Using an agent-based model, we demonstrate that toxicity attacks on Wikipedia have the potential to impede the progress of the entire project. Our results underscore the importance of mitigating toxic speech on collaborative platforms such as Wikipedia to ensure their continued success.

Understanding why users tag: A survey of tagging motivation literature and results from an empirical study.

While recent progress has been achieved in understanding the structure and dynamics of social tagging systems, we know little about the underlying user motivations for tagging, and how they influence resulting folksonomies and tags. This paper addresses three issues related to this question. (1) What distinctions of user motivations are identified by previous research, and in what ways are the motivations of users amenable to quantitative analysis? (2) To what extent does tagging motivation vary across different social tagging systems? (3) How does variability in user motivation influence resulting tags and folksonomies? In this paper, we present measures to detect whether a tagger is primarily motivated by categorizing or describing resources, and apply these measures to datasets from seven different tagging systems. Our results show that (a) users' motivation for tagging varies not only across, but also within tagging systems, and that (b) tag agreement among users who are motivated by categorizing resources is significantly lower than among users who are motivated by describing resources. Our findings are relevant for (1) the development of tag-based user interfaces, (2) the analysis of tag semantics and (3) the design of search algorithms for social tagging systems.

Inequality and inequity in network-based ranking and recommendation algorithms.

Though algorithms promise many benefits including efficiency, objectivity and accuracy, they may also introduce or amplify biases. Here we study two well-known algorithms, namely PageRank and Who-to-Follow (WTF), and show to what extent their ranks produce inequality and inequity when applied to directed social networks. To this end, we propose a directed network model with preferential attachment and homophily (DPAH) and demonstrate the influence of network structure on the rank distributions of these algorithms. Our main findings suggest that (i) inequality is positively correlated with inequity, (ii) inequality is driven by the interplay between preferential attachment, homophily, node activity and edge density, and (iii) inequity is driven by the interplay between homophily and minority size. In particular, these two algorithms reduce, replicate and amplify the representation of minorities in top ranks when majorities are homophilic, neutral and heterophilic, respectively. Moreover, when this representation is reduced, minorities may improve their visibility in the rank by connecting strategically in the network. For instance, by increasing their out-degree or homophily when majorities are also homophilic. These findings shed light on the social and algorithmic mechanisms that hinder equality and equity in network-based ranking and recommendation algorithms.

The Effects of Gender Signals and Performance in Online Product Reviews.

This work quantifies the effects of signaling gender through gender specific user names, on the success of reviews written on the popular amazon.com shopping platform. Highly rated reviews play an important role in e-commerce since they are prominently displayed next to products. Differences in reviews, perceived-consciously or unconsciously-with respect to gender signals, can lead to crucial biases in determining what content and perspectives are represented among top reviews. To investigate this, we extract signals of author gender from user names to select reviews where the author's likely gender can be inferred. Using reviews authored by these gender-signaling authors, we train a deep learning classifier to quantify the gendered writing style (i.e., gendered performance) of reviews written by authors who do not send clear gender signals via their user name. We contrast the effects of gender signaling and performance on the review helpfulness ratings using matching experiments. This is aimed at understanding if an advantage is to be gained by (not) signaling one's gender when posting reviews. While we find no general trend that gendered signals or performances influence overall review success, we find strong context-specific effects. For example, reviews in product categories such as Electronics or Computers are perceived as less helpful when authors signal that they are likely woman, but are received as more helpful in categories such as Beauty or Clothing. In addition to these interesting findings, we believe this general chain of tools could be deployed across various social media platforms.

Volunteer contributions to Wikipedia increased during COVID-19 mobility restrictions.

Wikipedia, the largest encyclopedia ever created, is a global initiative driven by volunteer contributions. When the COVID-19 pandemic broke out and mobility restrictions ensued across the globe, it was unclear whether contributions to Wikipedia would decrease in the face of the pandemic, or whether volunteers would withstand the added stress and increase their contributions to accommodate the growing readership uncovered in recent studies. We analyze [Formula: see text] million edits contributed from 2018 to 2020 across twelve Wikipedia language editions and find that Wikipedia's global volunteer community responded resiliently to the pandemic, substantially increasing both productivity and the number of newcomers who joined the community. For example, contributions to the English Wikipedia increased by over [Formula: see text] compared to the expectation derived from pre-pandemic data. Our work sheds light on the response of a global volunteer population to the COVID-19 crisis, providing valuable insights into the behavior of critical online communities under stress.

Homophily and minority-group size explain perception biases in social networks.

People's perceptions about the size of minority groups in social networks can be biased, often showing systematic over- or underestimation. These social perception biases are often attributed to biased cognitive or motivational processes. Here we show that both over- and underestimation of the size of a minority group can emerge solely from structural properties of social networks. Using a generative network model, we show that these biases depend on the level of homophily, its asymmetric nature and on the size of the minority group. Our model predictions correspond well with empirical data from a cross-cultural survey and with numerical calculations from six real-world networks. We also identify circumstances under which individuals can reduce their biases by relying on perceptions of their neighbours. This work advances our understanding of the impact of network structure on social perception biases and offers a quantitative approach for addressing related issues in society.

Homophily influences ranking of minorities in social networks.

Homophily can put minority groups at a disadvantage by restricting their ability to establish links with a majority group or to access novel information. Here, we show how this phenomenon can influence the ranking of minorities in examples of real-world networks with various levels of heterophily and homophily ranging from sexual contacts, dating contacts, scientific collaborations, and scientific citations. We devise a social network model with tunable homophily and group sizes, and demonstrate how the degree ranking of nodes from the minority group in a network is a function of (i) relative group sizes and (ii) the presence or absence of homophilic behaviour. We provide analytical insights on how the ranking of the minority can be improved to ensure the representativeness of the group and correct for potential biases. Our work presents a foundation for assessing the impact of homophilic and heterophilic behaviour on minorities in social networks.

A method for evaluating discoverability and navigability of recommendation algorithms.

Recommendations are increasingly used to support and enable discovery, browsing, and exploration of items. This is especially true for entertainment platforms such as Netflix or YouTube, where frequently, no clear categorization of items exists. Yet, the suitability of a recommendation algorithm to support these use cases cannot be comprehensively evaluated by any recommendation evaluation measures proposed so far. In this paper, we propose a method to expand the repertoire of existing recommendation evaluation techniques with a method to evaluate the discoverability and navigability of recommendation algorithms. The proposed method tackles this by means of first evaluating the discoverability of recommendation algorithms by investigating structural properties of the resulting recommender systems in terms of bow tie structure, and path lengths. Second, the method evaluates navigability by simulating three different models of information seeking scenarios and measuring the success rates. We show the feasibility of our method by applying it to four non-personalized recommendation algorithms on three data sets and also illustrate its applicability to personalized algorithms. Our work expands the arsenal of evaluation techniques for recommendation algorithms, extends from a one-click-based evaluation towards multi-click analysis, and presents a general, comprehensive method to evaluating navigability of arbitrary recommendation algorithms.

JANUS: A hypothesis-driven Bayesian approach for understanding edge formation in attributed multigraphs.

Understanding edge formation represents a key question in network analysis. Various approaches have been postulated across disciplines ranging from network growth models to statistical (regression) methods. In this work, we extend this existing arsenal of methods with JANUS, a hypothesis-driven Bayesian approach that allows to intuitively compare hypotheses about edge formation in multigraphs. We model the multiplicity of edges using a simple categorical model and propose to express hypotheses as priors encoding our belief about parameters. Using Bayesian model comparison techniques, we compare the relative plausibility of hypotheses which might be motivated by previous theories about edge formation based on popularity or similarity. We demonstrate the utility of our approach on synthetic and empirical data. JANUS is relevant for researchers interested in studying mechanisms explaining edge formation in networks from both empirical and methodological perspectives.

How the structure of Wikipedia articles influences user navigation.

In this work we study how people navigate the information network of Wikipedia and investigate (i) free-form navigation by studying all clicks within the English Wikipedia over an entire month and (ii) goal-directed Wikipedia navigation by analyzing wikigames, where users are challenged to retrieve articles by following links. To study how the organization of Wikipedia articles in terms of layout and links affects navigation behavior, we first investigate the characteristics of the structural organization and of hyperlinks in Wikipedia and then evaluate link selection models based on article structure and other potential influences in navigation, such as the generality of an article's topic. In free-form Wikipedia navigation, covering all Wikipedia usage scenarios, we find that click choices can be best modeled by a bias towards article structure, such as a tendency to click links located in the lead section. For the goal-directed navigation of wikigames, our findings confirm the zoom-out and the homing-in phases identified by previous work, where users are guided by generality at first and textual similarity to the target later. However, our interpretation of the link selection models accentuates that article structure is the best explanation for the navigation paths in all except these initial and final stages. Overall, we find evidence that users more frequently click on links that are located close to the top of an article. The structure of Wikipedia articles, which places links to more general concepts near the top, supports navigation by allowing users to quickly find the better-connected articles that facilitate navigation. Our results highlight the importance of article structure and link position in Wikipedia navigation and suggest that better organization of information can help make information networks more navigable.

Evidence of Online Performance Deterioration in User Sessions on Reddit.

This article presents evidence of performance deterioration in online user sessions quantified by studying a massive dataset containing over 55 million comments posted on Reddit in April 2015. After segmenting the sessions (i.e., periods of activity without a prolonged break) depending on their intensity (i.e., how many posts users produced during sessions), we observe a general decrease in the quality of comments produced by users over the course of sessions. We propose mixed-effects models that capture the impact of session intensity on comments, including their length, quality, and the responses they generate from the community. Our findings suggest performance deterioration: Sessions of increasing intensity are associated with the production of shorter, progressively less complex comments, which receive declining quality scores (as rated by other users), and are less and less engaging (i.e., they attract fewer responses). Our contribution evokes a connection between cognitive and attention dynamics and the usage of online social peer production platforms, specifically the effects of deterioration of user performance.

Using ontologies to model human navigation behavior in information networks: A study based on Wikipedia.

The need to examine the behavior of different user groups is a fundamental requirement when building information systems. In this paper, we present Ontology-based Decentralized Search (OBDS), a novel method to model the navigation behavior of users equipped with different types of background knowledge. Ontology-based Decentralized Search combines decentralized search, an established method for navigation in social networks, and ontologies to model navigation behavior in information networks. The method uses ontologies as an explicit representation of background knowledge to inform the navigation process and guide it towards navigation targets. By using different ontologies, users equipped with different types of background knowledge can be represented. We demonstrate our method using four biomedical ontologies and their associated Wikipedia articles. We compare our simulation results with base line approaches and with results obtained from a user study. We find that our method produces click paths that have properties similar to those originating from human navigators. The results suggest that our method can be used to model human navigation behavior in systems that are based on information networks, such as Wikipedia. This paper makes the following contributions: (i) To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to demonstrate the utility of ontologies in modeling human navigation and (ii) it yields new insights and understanding about the mechanisms of human navigation in information networks.

Detecting memory and structure in human navigation patterns using Markov chain models of varying order.

One of the most frequently used models for understanding human navigation on the Web is the Markov chain model, where Web pages are represented as states and hyperlinks as probabilities of navigating from one page to another. Predominantly, human navigation on the Web has been thought to satisfy the memoryless Markov property stating that the next page a user visits only depends on her current page and not on previously visited ones. This idea has found its way in numerous applications such as Google's PageRank algorithm and others. Recently, new studies suggested that human navigation may better be modeled using higher order Markov chain models, i.e., the next page depends on a longer history of past clicks. Yet, this finding is preliminary and does not account for the higher complexity of higher order Markov chain models which is why the memoryless model is still widely used. In this work we thoroughly present a diverse array of advanced inference methods for determining the appropriate Markov chain order. We highlight strengths and weaknesses of each method and apply them for investigating memory and structure of human navigation on the Web. Our experiments reveal that the complexity of higher order models grows faster than their utility, and thus we confirm that the memoryless model represents a quite practical model for human navigation on a page level. However, when we expand our analysis to a topical level, where we abstract away from specific page transitions to transitions between topics, we find that the memoryless assumption is violated and specific regularities can be observed. We report results from experiments with two types of navigational datasets (goal-oriented vs. free form) and observe interesting structural differences that make a strong argument for more contextual studies of human navigation in future work.

PragmatiX: An Interactive Tool for Visualizing the Creation Process Behind Collaboratively Engineered Ontologies.

With the emergence of tools for collaborative ontology engineering, more and more data about the creation process behind collaborative construction of ontologies is becoming available. Today, collaborative ontology engineering tools such as Collaborative Protégé offer rich and structured logs of changes, thereby opening up new challenges and opportunities to study and analyze the creation of collaboratively constructed ontologies. While there exists a plethora of visualization tools for ontologies, they have primarily been built to visualize aspects of the final product (the ontology) and not the collaborative processes behind construction (e.g. the changes made by contributors over time). To the best of our knowledge, there exists no ontology visualization tool today that focuses primarily on visualizing the history behind collaboratively constructed ontologies. Since the ontology engineering processes can influence the quality of the final ontology, we believe that visualizing process data represents an important stepping-stone towards better understanding of managing the collaborative construction of ontologies in the future. In this application paper, we present a tool - PragmatiX - which taps into structured change logs provided by tools such as Collaborative Protégé to visualize various pragmatic aspects of collaborative ontology engineering. The tool is aimed at managers and leaders of collaborative ontology engineering projects to help them in monitoring progress, in exploring issues and problems, and in tracking quality-related issues such as overrides and coordination among contributors. The paper makes the following contributions: (i) we present PragmatiX, a tool for visualizing the creation process behind collaboratively constructed ontologies (ii) we illustrate the functionality and generality of the tool by applying it to structured logs of changes of two large collaborative ontology-engineering projects and (iii) we conduct a heuristic evaluation of the tool with domain experts to uncover early design challenges and opportunities for improvement. Finally, we hope that this work sparks a new line of research on visualization tools for collaborative ontology engineering projects.