Hao Yu

Hao Yu, Zachary Yang, Kellin Pelrine et al.

Recent advancements in large language models have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various NLP tasks. But many questions remain, including whether open-source models match closed ones, why these models excel or struggle with certain tasks, and what types of practical procedures can improve performance. We address these questions in the context of classification by evaluating three classes of models using eight datasets across three distinct tasks: named entity recognition, political party prediction, and misinformation detection. While larger LLMs often lead to improved performance, open-source models can rival their closed-source counterparts by fine-tuning. Moreover, supervised smaller models, like RoBERTa, can achieve similar or even greater performance in many datasets compared to generative LLMs. On the other hand, closed models maintain an advantage in hard tasks that demand the most generalizability. This study underscores the importance of model selection based on task requirements

Maximilian Puelma Touzel, Sneheel Sarangi, Austin Welch et al.

The rise of AI-driven manipulation poses significant risks to societal trust and democratic processes. Yet, studying these effects in real-world settings at scale is ethically and logistically impractical, highlighting a need for simulation tools that can model these dynamics in controlled settings to enable experimentation with possible defenses. We present a simulation environment designed to address this. We elaborate upon the Concordia framework that simulates offline, `real life' activity by adding online interactions to the simulation through social media with the integration of a Mastodon server. We improve simulation efficiency and information flow, and add a set of measurement tools, particularly longitudinal surveys. We demonstrate the simulator with a tailored example in which we track agents' political positions and show how partisan manipulation of agents can affect election results.

Juyong Zhang, Yuxin Yao, Yue Peng et al.

We propose a novel method to accelerate Lloyd's algorithm for K-Means clustering. Unlike previous acceleration approaches that reduce computational cost per iterations or improve initialization, our approach is focused on reducing the number of iterations required for convergence. This is achieved by treating the assignment step and the update step of Lloyd's algorithm as a fixed-point iteration, and applying Anderson acceleration, a well-established technique for accelerating fixed-point solvers. Classical Anderson acceleration utilizes m previous iterates to find an accelerated iterate, and its performance on K-Means clustering can be sensitive to choice of m and the distribution of samples. We propose a new strategy to dynamically adjust the value of m, which achieves robust and consistent speedups across different problem instances. Our method complements existing acceleration techniques, and can be combined with them to achieve state-of-the-art performance. We perform extensive experiments to evaluate the performance of the proposed method, where it outperforms other algorithms in 106 out of 120 test cases, and the mean decrease ratio of computational time is more than 33%.