MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044335285 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.10712

On Analyzing Antisocial Behaviors Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

2020· preprint· en· W3044335285 on OpenAlexaff
Md. Rabiul Awal, Rui Cao, Sandra Mitrović, Roy Ka-Wei Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXenophobiaPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TollSocial media2019-20 coronavirus outbreakAnnotationSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)CriminologyPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebRacismMedicineLawVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has developed to be more than a bio-crisis as global news has reported a sharp rise in xenophobia and discrimination in both online and offline communities. Such toxic behaviors take a heavy toll on society, especially during these daunting times. Despite the gravity of the issue, very few studies have studied online antisocial behaviors amid the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we fill the research gap by collecting and annotating a large dataset of over 40 million COVID-19 related tweets. Specially, we propose an annotation framework to annotate the antisocial behavior tweets automatically. We also conduct an empirical analysis of our annotated dataset and found that new abusive lexicons are introduced amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study also identified the vulnerable targets of antisocial behaviors and the factors that influence the spreading of online antisocial content.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.120 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207