Kristina Gligorić

Yiwei Luo, Kristina Gligorić, Dan Jurafsky · stanford

Identifying implicit attitudes toward food can mitigate social prejudice due to food's salience as a marker of ethnic identity. Stereotypes about food are representational harms that may contribute to racialized discourse and negatively impact economic outcomes for restaurants. Understanding the presence of representational harms in online corpora in particular is important, given the increasing use of large language models (LLMs) for text generation and their tendency to reproduce attitudes in their training data. Through careful linguistic analyses, we evaluate social theories about attitudes toward immigrant cuisine in a large-scale study of framing differences in 2.1M English language Yelp reviews. Controlling for factors such as restaurant price and neighborhood racial diversity, we find that immigrant cuisines are more likely to be othered using socially constructed frames of authenticity (e.g., "authentic," "traditional"), and that non-European cuisines (e.g., Indian, Mexican) in particular are described as more exotic compared to European ones (e.g., French). We also find that non-European cuisines are more likely to be described as cheap and dirty, even after controlling for price, and even among the most expensive restaurants. Finally, we show that reviews generated by LLMs reproduce similar framing tendencies, pointing to the downstream retention of these representational harms. Our results corroborate social theories of gastronomic stereotyping, revealing racialized evaluative processes and linguistic strategies through which they manifest.

Kristina Gligorić, Tijana Zrnic, Cinoo Lee et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown high agreement with human raters across a variety of tasks, demonstrating potential to ease the challenges of human data collection. In computational social science (CSS), researchers are increasingly leveraging LLM annotations to complement slow and expensive human annotations. Still, guidelines for collecting and using LLM annotations, without compromising the validity of downstream conclusions, remain limited. We introduce Confidence-Driven Inference: a method that combines LLM annotations and LLM confidence indicators to strategically select which human annotations should be collected, with the goal of producing accurate statistical estimates and provably valid confidence intervals while reducing the number of human annotations needed. Our approach comes with safeguards against LLM annotations of poor quality, guaranteeing that the conclusions will be both valid and no less accurate than if we only relied on human annotations. We demonstrate the effectiveness of Confidence-Driven Inference over baselines in statistical estimation tasks across three CSS settings--text politeness, stance, and bias--reducing the needed number of human annotations by over 25% in each. Although we use CSS settings for demonstration, Confidence-Driven Inference can be used to estimate most standard quantities across a broad range of NLP problems.

Omar Shaikh, Kristina Gligorić, Ashna Khetan et al.

Effective conversation requires common ground: a shared understanding between the participants. Common ground, however, does not emerge spontaneously in conversation. Speakers and listeners work together to both identify and construct a shared basis while avoiding misunderstanding. To accomplish grounding, humans rely on a range of dialogue acts, like clarification (What do you mean?) and acknowledgment (I understand.). However, it is unclear whether large language models (LLMs) generate text that reflects human grounding. To this end, we curate a set of grounding acts and propose corresponding metrics that quantify attempted grounding. We study whether LLM generations contain grounding acts, simulating turn-taking from several dialogue datasets and comparing results to humans. We find that -- compared to humans -- LLMs generate language with less conversational grounding, instead generating text that appears to simply presume common ground. To understand the roots of the identified grounding gap, we examine the role of instruction tuning and preference optimization, finding that training on contemporary preference data leads to a reduction in generated grounding acts. Altogether, we highlight the need for more research investigating conversational grounding in human-AI interaction.

Anna T. Thomas, Adam Yee, Andrew Mayne et al.

Food systems are responsible for a third of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. We investigate what Large Language Models (LLMs) can contribute to reducing the environmental impacts of food production. We define a typology of design and prediction tasks based on the sustainable food literature and collaboration with domain experts, and evaluate six LLMs on four tasks in our typology. For example, for a sustainable protein design task, food science experts estimated that collaboration with an LLM can reduce time spent by 45% on average, compared to 22% for collaboration with another expert human food scientist. However, for a sustainable menu design task, LLMs produce suboptimal solutions when instructed to consider both human satisfaction and climate impacts. We propose a general framework for integrating LLMs with combinatorial optimization to improve reasoning capabilities. Our approach decreases emissions of food choices by 79% in a hypothetical restaurant while maintaining participants' satisfaction with their set of choices. Our results demonstrate LLMs' potential, supported by optimization techniques, to accelerate sustainable food development and adoption.

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.

Kaitlyn Zhou, Kristina Gligorić, Myra Cheng et al.

Although language model-based chat systems are increasingly used in daily life, most Americans remain non-adopters of chat-based LLMs -- as of June 2025, 66% had never used ChatGPT. At the same time, LLM development and evaluation rely mainly on data from adopters (e.g., logs, preference data), focusing on the needs and tasks for a limited demographic group of adopters in terms of geographic location, education, and gender. In this position paper, we argue that incorporating non-adopter perspectives is essential for developing broadly useful and capable LLMs. We contend that relying on methods that focus primarily on adopters will risk missing a range of tasks and needs prioritized by non-adopters, entrenching inequalities in who benefits from LLMs, and creating oversights in model development and evaluation. To illustrate this claim, we conduct case studies with non-adopters and show: how non-adopter needs diverge from those of current users, how non-adopter needs point us towards novel reasoning tasks, and how to systematically integrate non-adopter needs via human-centered methods.

Maxime Peyrard, Beatriz Borges, Kristina Gligorić et al.

The automatic detection of humor poses a grand challenge for natural language processing. Transformer-based systems have recently achieved remarkable results on this task, but they usually (1)~were evaluated in setups where serious vs humorous texts came from entirely different sources, and (2)~focused on benchmarking performance without providing insights into how the models work. We make progress in both respects by training and analyzing transformer-based humor recognition models on a recently introduced dataset consisting of minimal pairs of aligned sentences, one serious, the other humorous. We find that, although our aligned dataset is much harder than previous datasets, transformer-based models recognize the humorous sentence in an aligned pair with high accuracy (78%). In a careful error analysis, we characterize easy vs hard instances. Finally, by analyzing attention weights, we obtain important insights into the mechanisms by which transformers recognize humor. Most remarkably, we find clear evidence that one single attention head learns to recognize the words that make a test sentence humorous, even without access to this information at training time.

Kristina Gligorić, Ryen W. White, Emre Kıcıman et al.

Nutrition is a key determinant of long-term health, and social influence has long been theorized to be a key determinant of nutrition. It has been difficult to quantify the postulated role of social influence on nutrition using traditional methods such as surveys, due to the typically small scale and short duration of studies. To overcome these limitations, we leverage a novel source of data: logs of 38 million food purchases made over an 8-year period on the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) university campus, linked to anonymized individuals via the smartcards used to make on-campus purchases. In a longitudinal observational study, we ask: How is a person's food choice affected by eating with someone else whose own food choice is healthy vs. unhealthy? To estimate causal effects from the passively observed log data, we control confounds in a matched quasi-experimental design: we identify focal users who at first do not have any regular eating partners but then start eating with a fixed partner regularly, and we match focal users into comparison pairs such that paired users are nearly identical with respect to covariates measured before acquiring the partner, where the two focal users' new eating partners diverge in the healthiness of their respective food choice. A difference-in-differences analysis of the paired data yields clear evidence of social influence: focal users acquiring a healthy-eating partner change their habits significantly more toward healthy foods than focal users acquiring an unhealthy-eating partner. We further identify foods whose purchase frequency is impacted significantly by the eating partner's healthiness of food choice. Beyond the main results, the work demonstrates the utility of passively sensed food purchase logs for deriving insights, with the potential of informing the design of public health interventions and food offerings.

Kristina Gligorić, Ashton Anderson, Robert West

In November 2017, Twitter doubled the maximum allowed tweet length from 140 to 280 characters, a drastic switch on one of the world's most influential social media platforms. In the first long-term study of how the new length limit was adopted by Twitter users, we ask: Does the effect of the new length limit resemble that of the old one? Or did the doubling of the limit fundamentally change how Twitter is shaped by the limited length of posted content? By analyzing Twitter's publicly available 1% sample over a period of around 3 years, we find that, when the length limit was raised from 140 to 280 characters, the prevalence of tweets around 140 characters dropped immediately, while the prevalence of tweets around 280 characters rose steadily for about 6 months. Despite this rise, tweets approaching the length limit have been far less frequent after than before the switch. We find widely different adoption rates across languages and client-device types. The prevalence of tweets around 140 characters before the switch in a given language is strongly correlated with the prevalence of tweets around 280 characters after the switch in the same language, and very long tweets are vastly more popular on Web clients than on mobile clients. Moreover, tweets of around 280 characters after the switch are syntactically and semantically similar to tweets of around 140 characters before the switch, manifesting patterns of message squeezing in both cases. Taken together, these findings suggest that the new 280-character limit constitutes a new, less intrusive version of the old 140-character limit. The length limit remains an important factor that should be considered in all studies using Twitter data.