Predicting the risk of bad-actor-AI

Scienmag

Bad actors are predicted to begin using AI daily by the middle of 2024, according to a study. Neil F. Johnson and colleagues map the online landscape of communities centered around hate, beginning by searching for terms found in the Anti-Defamation League Hate Symbols Database, along with the names of hate groups tracked by the Southern Poverty Law Center. From an initial list of “bad-actor” communities found using these terms, the authors assess communities linked to by the bad-actor communities.

Read the full article >>

Controlling bad-actor-artificial intelligence activity at scale across online battlefields

PNAS Nexus

We consider the looming threat of bad actors using artificial intelligence (AI)/Generative Pretrained Transformer to generate harms across social media globally. Guided by our detailed mapping of the online multiplatform battlefield, we offer answers to the key questions of what bad-actor-AI activity will likely dominate, where, when — and what might be done to control it at scale. Applying a dynamical Red Queen analysis from prior studies of cyber and automated algorithm attacks, predicts an escalation to daily bad-actor-AI activity by mid-2024 — just ahead of United States and other global elections. We then use an exactly solvable mathematical model of the observed bad-actor community clustering dynamics, to build a Policy Matrix which quantifies the outcomes and trade-offs between two potentially desirable outcomes: containment of future bad-actor-AI activity vs. its complete removal. We also give explicit plug-and-play formulae for associated risk measures.

Neil Johnson, Richard Sear, Lucia Illari

View article >>

‘Bad actor’ AI predicted to pose daily threat to democracies by mid-2024

New Atlas

A new study has predicted that AI activity by ‘bad actors’ determined to cause online harm through the spread of disinformation will be a daily occurrence by the middle of 2024. The findings are concerning given that more than 50 countries, including the US, will hold national elections this year, the outcomes of which will have a global impact.

Read the full article >>

Complexity of the online distrust ecosystem and its evolution

Frontiers in Complex Systems

Collective human distrust—and its associated mis/disinformation—is one of the most complex phenomena of our time, given that approximately 70% of the global population is now online. Current examples include distrust of medical expertise, climate change science, democratic election outcomes—and even distrust of fact-checked events in the current Israel-Hamas and Ukraine-Russia conflicts.

Lucia Illari, Nicholas J. Restrepo, Neil Johnson

View article >>

Inductive detection of influence operations via graph learning

Scientific Reports

Influence operations are large-scale efforts to manipulate public opinion. The rapid detection and disruption of these operations is critical for healthy public discourse. Emergent AI technologies may enable novel operations that evade detection and influence public discourse on social media with greater scale, reach, and specificity. New methods of detection with inductive learning capacity will be needed to identify novel operations before they indelibly alter public opinion and events. To this end, we develop an inductive learning framework that: (1) determines content- and graph-based indicators that are not specific to any operation; (2) uses graph learning to encode abstract signatures of coordinated manipulation; and (3) evaluates generalization capacity by training and testing models across operations originating from Russia, China, and Iran. We find that this framework enables strong cross-operation generalization while also revealing salient indicators-illustrating a generic approach which directly complements transductive methodologies, thereby enhancing detection coverage.

Nicholas Gabriel, David Broniatowski, Neil Johnson

View article >>

Simplifying Complexity: The Mathematics of War, Part 2

Simplifying Complexity

In our last episode, Neil Johnson explained how there was an underlying power law with a slope of 1.8 that described the number of casualties that occur in wars.

Today’s episode digs deeper into where this power law comes from, the route that Neil’s research took to explain it, and how the arrival of the internet finally provided the missing datasets required to understand the underlying structure of something seemingly as chaotic as war.

Neil is Professor of Physics and Head of the Dynamic Online Networks Lab at George Washington University.

Listen on your podcast provider >>

Explaining conflict violence in terms of conflict actor dynamics

Scientific Reports

We study the severity of conflict-related violence in Colombia at an unprecedented granular scale in space and across time. Splitting the data into different geographical regions and different historically-relevant periods, we uncover variations in the patterns of conflict severity which we then explain in terms of local conflict actors’ different collective behaviors and/or conditions using a simple mathematical model of conflict actors’ grouping dynamics (coalescence and fragmentation). Specifically, variations in the approximate scaling values of the distributions of event lethalities can be explained by the changing strength ratio of the local conflict actors for distinct conflict eras and organizational regions. In this way, our findings open the door to a new granular spectroscopy of human conflicts in terms of local conflict actor strength ratios for any armed conflict.

Katerina Tkacova, Annette Idler, Neil Johnson, Eduardo López

View article >>

Simplifying Complexity: The Mathematics of War, Part 1

Simplifying Complexity

When we think of what caused a certain number of people to die in a specific war, we tend to think about a number of factors. for example, the terrain or political drivers. But what if the number of deaths that occur in a war is actually dictated by something far less obvious?

Neil Johnson, Professor of Physics and Head of the Dynamic Online Networks Lab at George Washington University, has returned to explain how studying the casualties of war can give us a greater understanding of the causes of war.

Listen on your podcast provider >>