Giuseppe Russo

Giuseppe Russo, Christoph Gote, Laurence Brandenberger et al.

In the U.S. Congress, legislators can use active and passive cosponsorship to support bills. We show that these two types of cosponsorship are driven by two different motivations: the backing of political colleagues and the backing of the bill's content. To this end, we develop an Encoder+RGCN based model that learns legislator representations from bill texts and speech transcripts. These representations predict active and passive cosponsorship with an F1-score of 0.88. Applying our representations to predict voting decisions, we show that they are interpretable and generalize to unseen tasks.

Giuseppe Russo, Luca Verginer, Manoel Horta Ribeiro et al.

Online platforms face pressure to keep their communities civil and respectful. Thus, the bannings of problematic online communities from mainstream platforms like Reddit and Facebook are often met with enthusiastic public reactions. However, this policy can lead users to migrate to alternative fringe platforms with lower moderation standards and where antisocial behaviors like trolling and harassment are widely accepted. As users of these communities often remain co-active across mainstream and fringe platforms, antisocial behaviors may spill over onto the mainstream platform. We study this possible spillover by analyzing around 70,000 users from three banned communities that migrated to fringe platforms: r/The_Donald, r/GenderCritical, and r/Incels. Using a difference-in-differences design, we contrast co-active users with matched counterparts to estimate the causal effect of fringe platform participation on users' antisocial behavior on Reddit. Our results show that participating in the fringe communities increases users' toxicity on Reddit (as measured by Perspective API) and involvement with subreddits similar to the banned community -- which often also breach platform norms. The effect intensifies with time and exposure to the fringe platform. In short, we find evidence for a spillover of antisocial behavior from fringe platforms onto Reddit via co-participation.

Giuseppe Russo, Niklas Stoehr, Manoel Horta Ribeiro · eth-zurich

Conspiracy Theory Identication task is a new shared task proposed for the first time at the Evalita 2023. The ACTI challenge, based exclusively on comments published on conspiratorial channels of telegram, is divided into two subtasks: (i) Conspiratorial Content Classification: identifying conspiratorial content and (ii) Conspiratorial Category Classification about specific conspiracy theory classification. A total of fifteen teams participated in the task for a total of 81 submissions. We illustrate the best performing approaches were based on the utilization of large language models. We finally draw conclusions about the utilization of these models for counteracting the spreading of misinformation in online platforms.

Giuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Giona Casiraghi et al.

The proliferation of radical online communities and their violent offshoots has sparked great societal concern. However, the current practice of banning such communities from mainstream platforms has unintended consequences: (I) the further radicalization of their members in fringe platforms where they migrate; and (ii) the spillover of harmful content from fringe back onto mainstream platforms. Here, in a large observational study on two banned subreddits, r/The\_Donald and r/fatpeoplehate, we examine how factors associated with the RECRO radicalization framework relate to users' migration decisions. Specifically, we quantify how these factors affect users' decisions to post on fringe platforms and, for those who do, whether they continue posting on the mainstream platform. Our results show that individual-level factors, those relating to the behavior of users, are associated with the decision to post on the fringe platform. Whereas social-level factors, users' connection with the radical community, only affect the propensity to be coactive on both platforms. Overall, our findings pave the way for evidence-based moderation policies, as the decisions to migrate and remain coactive amplify unintended consequences of community bans.

Giuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Robert West

Fringe communities promoting conspiracy theories and extremist ideologies have thrived on mainstream platforms, raising questions about the mechanisms driving their growth. Here, we hypothesize and study a possible mechanism: new members may be recruited through fringe-interactions: the exchange of comments between members and non-members of fringe communities. We apply text-based causal inference techniques to study the impact of fringe-interactions on the growth of three prominent fringe communities on Reddit: r/Incel, r/GenderCritical, and r/The_Donald. Our results indicate that fringe-interactions attract new members to fringe communities. Users who receive these interactions are up to 4.2 percentage points (pp) more likely to join fringe communities than similar, matched users who do not. This effect is influenced by 1) the characteristics of communities where the interaction happens (e.g., left vs. right-leaning communities) and 2) the language used in the interactions. Interactions using toxic language have a 5pp higher chance of attracting newcomers to fringe communities than non-toxic interactions. We find no effect when repeating this analysis by replacing fringe (r/Incel, r/GenderCritical, and r/The_Donald) with non-fringe communities (r/climatechange, r/NBA, r/leagueoflegends), suggesting this growth mechanism is specific to fringe communities. Overall, our findings suggest that curtailing fringe-interactions may reduce the growth of fringe communities on mainstream platforms.

Tim R. Davidson, Viacheslav Surkov, Veniamin Veselovsky et al.

A rapidly growing number of applications rely on a small set of closed-source language models (LMs). This dependency might introduce novel security risks if LMs develop self-recognition capabilities. Inspired by human identity verification methods, we propose a novel approach for assessing self-recognition in LMs using model-generated "security questions". Our test can be externally administered to monitor frontier models as it does not require access to internal model parameters or output probabilities. We use our test to examine self-recognition in ten of the most capable open- and closed-source LMs currently publicly available. Our extensive experiments found no empirical evidence of general or consistent self-recognition in any examined LM. Instead, our results suggest that given a set of alternatives, LMs seek to pick the "best" answer, regardless of its origin. Moreover, we find indications that preferences about which models produce the best answers are consistent across LMs. We additionally uncover novel insights on position bias considerations for LMs in multiple-choice settings.

Francesco Corso, Giuseppe Russo, Francesco Pierri et al.

The interaction between fringe subcultures and mainstream online communities poses significant challenges for understanding discourse on social media. In this work, we investigate whether users active in conspiracy-focused communities exhibit detectable linguistic signatures when participating in general-interest spaces, such as news, humor, or hobbyist forums. We analyze a large-scale longitudinal dataset of over 500 million comments spanning 10 years of Reddit activity, examining the communication patterns of these users across diverse social contexts independent of the topics they discuss. We show that these users exhibit distinctive linguistic patterns that enable machine learning models to reliably distinguish them from the general population within individual communities (averaging 87\% accuracy across more than 20 binary classification tasks). Crucially, no single aggregate model captures these patterns across communities, as community-specific models outperform global classifiers by up to 17 percentage points. This result suggests that while these users are distinct, their linguistic expression is dynamic and highly responsive to the social norms of the environment they inhabit. Our findings suggest the need for tailored interventions in online spaces, as linguistic signals associated with conspiracy and fringe subcultures vary across communities and cannot be effectively addressed by uniform detection or moderation strategies.

Carlo Bono, Nick Liu, Giuseppe Russo et al.

Moderation and blocking behavior, both closely related to the mitigation of abuse and misinformation on social platforms, are fundamental mechanisms for maintaining healthy online communities. However, while centralized platforms typically employ top-down moderation, decentralized networks rely on users to self-regulate through mechanisms like blocking actions to safeguard their online experience. Given the novelty of the decentralized paradigm, addressing self-moderation is critical for understanding how community safety and user autonomy can be effectively balanced. This study examines user blocking on Bluesky, a decentralized social networking platform, providing a comprehensive analysis of over three months of user activity through the lens of blocking behaviour. We define profiles based on 86 features that describe user activity, content characteristics, and network interactions, addressing two primary questions: (1) Is the likelihood of a user being blocked inferable from their online behavior? and (2) What behavioral features are associated with an increased likelihood of being blocked? Our findings offer valuable insights and contribute with a robust analytical framework to advance research in moderation on decentralized social networks.

Francesco Salvi, Giuseppe Russo, Adam Barla et al.

Meat consumption is a major driver of global greenhouse gas emissions. While pricing interventions have shown potential to reduce meat intake, previous studies have focused on highly constrained environments with limited consumer choice. Here, we present the first large-scale field experiment to evaluate multiple pricing interventions in a real-world, competitive setting. Using a sequential crossover design with matched menus in a Swiss university campus, we systematically compared vegetarian-meal discounts (-2.5 CHF), meat surcharges (+2.5 CHF), and a combined scheme (-1.2 CHF=+1.2 CHF) across four campus cafeterias. Only the surcharge and combined interventions led to significant increases in vegetarian meal uptake--by 26.4% and 16.6%, respectively--and reduced CO2 emissions per meal by 7.4% and 11.3%, respectively. The surcharge, while effective, triggered a 12.3% drop in sales at intervention sites and a corresponding 14.9% increase in non-treated locations, hence causing a spillover effect that completely offset environmental gains. In contrast, the combined approach achieved meaningful emission reductions without significant effects on overall sales or revenue, making it both effective and economically viable. Notably, pricing interventions were equally effective for both vegetarian-leaning customers and habitual meat-eaters, stimulating change even within entrenched dietary habits. Our results show that balanced pricing strategies can reduce the carbon footprint of realistic food environments, but require coordinated implementation to maximize climate benefits and avoid unintended spillover effects.

Alexandros Efstratiou, Giuseppe Russo, Luca Luceri

Online discussions of science involve complex interactions among experts, news media, and social media users as they interpret and disseminate scientific findings. While prior work has examined these actors in isolation, their interplay in shaping science communication remains poorly understood. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, we analyze 1.24M tweets and 211k news articles that reference pandemic-related scientific papers. We find that the most influential Twitter accounts in this discourse are predominantly individuals with medical or research credentials. However, we also identify a coordinated network that disproportionately amplifies a small set of prominent credentialed experts who advance contrarian, anti-consensus positions on vaccines, lockdowns, and related topics. The papers promoted by these influential actors substantially overlap with those covered by news media, but with key differences: pro-consensus experts primarily engage with studies featured by mainstream and medical outlets, whereas contrarian experts align more closely with papers promoted by low-quality, pseudoscientific, or conspiratorial sources. Notably, news outlets tend to report on scientific studies after they have been highlighted by social media superspreaders. Together, these findings reveal multi-level pathways of information flow and coordinated amplification structures that shape science communication across social media and news, offering new insights into the dynamics of the broader information ecosystem.

Giuseppe Russo, Debora Nozza, Paul Röttger et al.

People increasingly rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) for moral advice, which may influence humans' decisions. Yet, little is known about how closely LLMs align with human moral judgments. To address this, we introduce the Moral Dilemma Dataset, a benchmark of 1,618 real-world moral dilemmas paired with a distribution of human moral judgments consisting of a binary evaluation and a free-text rationale. We treat this problem as a pluralistic distributional alignment task, comparing the distributions of LLM and human judgments across dilemmas. We find that models reproduce human judgments only under high consensus; alignment deteriorates sharply when human disagreement increases. In parallel, using a 60-value taxonomy built from 3,783 value expressions extracted from rationales, we show that LLMs rely on a narrower set of moral values than humans. These findings reveal a pluralistic moral gap: a mismatch in both the distribution and diversity of values expressed. To close this gap, we introduce Dynamic Moral Profiling (DMP), a Dirichlet-based sampling method that conditions model outputs on human-derived value profiles. DMP improves alignment by 64.3% and enhances value diversity, offering a step toward more pluralistic and human-aligned moral guidance from LLMs.

Giuseppe Russo, Kristina Gligorić, Vincent Moreau et al.

Reducing meat consumption is crucial for achieving global environmental and nutritional targets. Meat-Free Day (MFD) is a widely adopted strategy to address this challenge by encouraging plant-based diets through the removal of animal-based meals. We assessed the environmental, behavioral, and nutritional impacts of MFD by implementing 67 MFDs over 18 months (once a week on a randomly chosen day) across 12 cafeterias on a large university campus, analyzing over 400,000 food purchases. MFD reduced on-campus food-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on treated days by 52.9% and contributed to improved fiber (+26.9%) and cholesterol (-4.5%) consumption without altering caloric intake. These nutritional benefits were, however, accompanied by a 27.6% decrease in protein intake and a 34.2% increase in sugar consumption. Moreover, the increase in plant-based meals did not carry over to subsequent days, as evidenced by a 3.5% rebound in animal-based meal consumption on days immediately following treated days. MFD also led to a 16.8% drop in on-campus meal sales on treated days.Monte Carlo simulations suggest that if 8.7% of diners were to eat burgers off-campus on treated days, MFD's GHG savings would be fully negated. As our analysis identifies on-campus customer retention as the main challenge to MFD effectiveness, we recommend combining MFD with customer retention interventions to ensure environmental and nutritional benefits.

Stefan Krsteski, Giuseppe Russo, Serina Chang et al.

Surveys provide valuable insights into public opinion and behavior, but their execution is costly and slow. Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as a scalable, low-cost substitute for human respondents, but their outputs are often biased and yield invalid estimates. We study the interplay between synthesis methods that use LLMs to generate survey responses and rectification methods that debias population estimates, and explore how human responses are best allocated between them. Using two panel surveys with questions on nutrition, politics, and economics, we find that synthesis alone introduces substantial bias (24-86%), whereas combining it with rectification reduces bias below 5% and increases effective sample size by up to 14%. Overall, we challenge the common practice of using all human responses for fine-tuning, showing that under a fixed budget, allocating most to rectification results in far more effective estimation.

Bich Ngoc, Doan, Giuseppe Russo et al.

The rise of conspiracy theories has created far-reaching societal harm in the public discourse by eroding trust and fueling polarization. Beyond this public impact lies a deeply personal toll on the friends and families of conspiracy believers, a dimension often overlooked in large-scale computational research. This study fills this gap by systematically mapping radicalization journeys and quantifying the associated emotional toll inflicted on loved ones. We use the prominent case of QAnon as a case study, analyzing 12747 narratives from the r/QAnonCasualties support community through a novel mixed-methods approach. First, we use topic modeling (BERTopic) to map the radicalization trajectories, identifying key pre-existing conditions, triggers, and post-radicalization characteristics. From this, we apply an LDA-based graphical model to uncover six recurring archetypes of QAnon adherents, which we term "radicalization personas." Finally, using LLM-assisted emotion detection and regression modeling, we link these personas to the specific emotional toll reported by narrators. Our findings reveal that these personas are not just descriptive; they are powerful predictors of the specific emotional harms experienced by narrators. Radicalization perceived as a deliberate ideological choice is associated with narrator anger and disgust, while those marked by personal and cognitive collapse are linked to fear and sadness. This work provides the first empirical framework for understanding radicalization as a relational phenomenon, offering a vital roadmap for researchers and practitioners to navigate its interpersonal fallout.

Giuseppe Russo, Nora Hollenstein, Claudiu Musat et al.

We introduce CGA, a conditional VAE architecture, to control, generate, and augment text. CGA is able to generate natural English sentences controlling multiple semantic and syntactic attributes by combining adversarial learning with a context-aware loss and a cyclical word dropout routine. We demonstrate the value of the individual model components in an ablation study. The scalability of our approach is ensured through a single discriminator, independently of the number of attributes. We show high quality, diversity and attribute control in the generated sentences through a series of automatic and human assessments. As the main application of our work, we test the potential of this new NLG model in a data augmentation scenario. In a downstream NLP task, the sentences generated by our CGA model show significant improvements over a strong baseline, and a classification performance often comparable to adding same amount of additional real data.