Giulio Cimini

Daniele Cirulli, Giulio Cimini, Giovanni Palermo

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently emerged as powerful tools for natural language generation, with applications spanning from content creation to social simulations. Their ability to mimic human interactions raises both opportunities and concerns, particularly in the context of politically relevant online discussions. In this study, we evaluate the performance of LLMs in replicating user-generated content within a real-world, divisive scenario: Reddit conversations during the 2016 US Presidential election. In particular, we conduct three different experiments, asking GPT-4 to generate comments by impersonating either real or artificial partisan users. We analyze the generated comments in terms of political alignment, sentiment, and linguistic features, comparing them against real user contributions and benchmarking against a null model. We find that GPT-4 is able to produce realistic comments, both in favor of or against the candidate supported by the community, yet tending to create consensus more easily than dissent. In addition we show that real and artificial comments are well separated in a semantically embedded space, although they are indistinguishable by manual inspection. Our findings provide insights on the potential use of LLMs to sneak into online discussions, influence political debate and shape political narratives, bearing broader implications of AI-driven discourse manipulation.

Hao Liao, Rui Xiao, Giulio Cimini et al.

The ever-increasing quantity and complexity of scientific production have made it difficult for researchers to keep track of advances in their own fields. This, together with growing popularity of online scientific communities, calls for the development of effective information filtering tools. We propose here a method to simultaneously compute reputation of users and quality of scientific artifacts in an online scientific community. Evaluation on artificially-generated data and real data from the Econophysics Forum is used to determine the method's best-performing variants. We show that when the method is extended by considering author credit, its performance improves on multiple levels. In particular, top papers have higher citation count and top authors have higher $h$-index than top papers and top authors chosen by other algorithms.

Duanbing Chen, An Zeng, Giulio Cimini et al.

People in the Internet era have to cope with the information overload, striving to find what they are interested in, and usually face this situation by following a limited number of sources or friends that best match their interests. A recent line of research, namely adaptive social recommendation, has therefore emerged to optimize the information propagation in social networks and provide users with personalized recommendations. Validation of these methods by agent-based simulations often assumes that the tastes of users and can be represented by binary vectors, with entries denoting users' preferences. In this work we introduce a more realistic assumption that users' tastes are modeled by multiple vectors. We show that within this framework the social recommendation process has a poor outcome. Accordingly, we design novel measures of users' taste similarity that can substantially improve the precision of the recommender system. Finally, we discuss the issue of enhancing the recommendations' diversity while preserving their accuracy.