Search for: All records

The widespread use of social media has led to a surge in popularity for automated methods of analyzing public opinion. Supervised methods are adept at text categorization, yet the dynamic nature of social media discussions poses a continual challenge for these techniques due to the constant shifting of the focus. On the other hand, traditional unsupervised methods for extracting themes from public discourse, such as topic modeling, often reveal overarching patterns that might not capture specific nuances. Consequently, a significant portion of research into social media discourse still depends on labor-intensive manual coding techniques and a human-in-the-loop approach, which are both time-consuming and costly. In this work, we study the problem of discovering arguments associated with a specific theme. We propose a generic **LLMs-in-the-Loop** strategy that leverages the advanced capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract latent arguments from social media messaging. To demonstrate our approach, we apply our framework to contentious topics. We use two publicly available datasets: (1) the climate campaigns dataset of 14k Facebook ads with 25 themes and (2) the COVID-19 vaccine campaigns dataset of 9k Facebook ads with 14 themes. Additionally, we design a downstream task as stance prediction by leveraging talking points in climate debates. Furthermore, we analyze demographic targeting and the adaptation of messaging based on real-world events. 

Large language models (LLMs) struggle in social science domains, where critical thinking and human-level inference are crucial. In this work, we propose a multi-agent social reasoning framework that leverages the generative and reasoning capabilities of LLMs to generate and evaluate reasons from multiple perspectives grounded in social science theories, and construct a factor graph for inference. Experimental results on understanding power dynamics in conversations show that our method outperforms standard prompting baselines, demonstrating its potential for tackling hard Computational Social Science (CSS) tasks. 

Conversations often adhere to well-understood social norms that vary across cultures. For example, while addressing work superiors by their first name is commonplace in the Western culture, it is rare in Asian cultures. Adherence or violation of such norms often dictates the tenor of conversations. Humans are able to navigate social situations requiring cultural awareness quite adeptly. However, it is a hard task for NLP models. In this paper, we tackle this problem by introducing a Cultural Context Schema for conversations. It comprises (1) conversational information such as emotions, dialogue acts, etc., and (2) cultural information such as social norms, violations, etc. We generate ∼110k social norm and violation descriptions for ∼23k conversations from Chinese culture using LLMs. We refine them using automated verification strategies which are evaluated against culturally aware human judgements. We organize these descriptions into meaningful structures we call Norm Concepts, using an interactive human-in-the-loop framework. We ground the norm concepts and the descriptions in conversations using symbolic annotation. Finally, we use the obtained dataset for downstream tasks such as emotion, sentiment, and dialogue act detection. We show that it significantly improves the empirical performance. 

Understanding the dynamics of counseling conversations is an important task, yet it is a challenging NLP problem regardless of the recent advance of Transformer-based pre-trained language models. This paper proposes a systematic approach to examine the efficacy of domain knowledge and large language models (LLMs) in better representing conversations between a crisis counselor and a help seeker. We empirically show that state-of-the-art language models such as Transformer-based models and GPT models fail to predict the conversation outcome. To provide richer context to conversations, we incorporate human-annotated domain knowledge and LLM-generated features; simple integration of domain knowledge and LLM features improves the model performance by approximately 15%. We argue that both domain knowledge and LLM-generated features can be exploited to better characterize counseling conversations when they are used as an additional context to conversations.