跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+7272新增论文
+6090其中 AI 相关
+125已有论文修订
+122新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 21:35 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 22:06 — 2026-11-05 22:06(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-05 21:35最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 21:33(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.37896

The Anatomy of Socio-Demographics in Pluralistic Offensiveness Modeling: When and Where It Helps, and the Role of Reasoning

Yifan Wang, Leixin Zhang, Jinyi Mu, Yu Wang, Mayank Jobanputra, Isabel Valera, Vera Demberg

Subjective judgments such as offensiveness often vary substantially across individuals, motivating pluralistic modeling approaches that incorporate annotators' socio-demographic information to capture this variation. However, prior findings on the benefits of socio-demographic information for pluralistic modeling are mixed, calling for a systematic analysis of both its effectiveness and the mechanisms through which it improves prediction. In this work, we study $\textbf{when}$ and $\textbf{where}$ socio-demographics benefit pluralistic offensiveness modeling, as well as $\textbf{the role of explicit reasoning}$ in leveraging this information. Across three multi-annotator datasets with prompted and trained LLMs, we first show that demographic gains are small and inconsistent for individual predictions but become clearer at the group and population levels, because aggregation attenuates the idiosyncratic variation that masks small but systematic demographic signals. Second, using a reasoning and prediction format that explicitly decomposes individual judgment into an overall baseline and a demographic-specific deviation, we show that the gains arise from both components: demographic information improves baseline estimation and enables meaningful demographic-specific shifts, and interventions show that better component estimates improve final predictions. Finally, comparing direct demographic conditioning with explicit reasoning about how the text interacts with annotator demographics, we find that reasoning yields more accurate baseline and shift estimates as well as final predictions, whereas conditioning alone rarely produces informative shifts. These results suggest that the mixed evidence in prior work may partly stem from individual-level evaluation, and that the value of socio-demographic information depends on both how it is evaluated and how models are guided to use it.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.AI
arXiv ↗PDF ↗