Arming the public with artificial intelligence to counter social bots
Open accessAbstract
The increased relevance of social media in our daily life has been accompanied by efforts to manipulate online conversations and opinions. Deceptive social bots—automated or semi-automated accounts designed to impersonate humans—have been successfully exploited for these kinds of abuse. Researchers have responded by developing artificial intelligence (AI) tools to arm the public in the fight against social bots. Here we review the literature on different types of bots, their impact, and detection methods. We use the case study of Botometer, a popular bot detection tool developed at Indiana University, to illustrate how people interact with AI countermeasures. A user experience survey suggests that bot detection has become an integral part of the social media experience for many users. However, barriers in interpreting the output of AI tools can lead to fundamental misunderstandings. The arms race between machine learning methods to develop sophisticated bots and effective countermeasures makes it necessary to update the training data and features of detection tools. We again use the Botometer case to illustrate both algorithmic and interpretability improvements of bot scores, designed to meet user expectations. We conclude by discussing how future AI developments may affect the fight between malicious bots and the public.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper reviews social bot characterization, impact, and detection, using Botometer as a case study of public-facing AI countermeasures. It reports a user survey and describes Botometer v3 improvements—calibration, Complete Automation Probability, and retraining—to make bot scores more interpretable and adaptive.
Key findings
- The literature review documents bot activity in health and politics, including 18K active bots pushing the MacronLeaks campaign during the 2017 French election; it also cites estimates that 9–15% of active Twitter accounts were bots in 2017 and that Facebook removed 1.5 billion fake accounts over six months in 2018.
- In a Botometer user experience survey with 731 usable responses (August–October 2018), more than one third of participants used Botometer at least weekly, over 80% believed it was accurate, and over 80% found bot scores easy to understand; occasional users cared more about false positives, while frequent users cared more about false negatives.
- Botometer v3 introduced calibrated scores via Platt scaling, rescaled scores to [0,5], and added Complete Automation Probability (CAP) using a prior P(Bot)=0.15; training data totaled 57,155 bots and 30,853 humans, v3 used 1,209 features, and cross-validation accuracy improved from 0.95 to 0.97 AUC.
- Botometer handles over a quarter million requests daily and its website receives over 500 daily visits, supporting third-party tools such as browser extensions and bot-hunting bots.
Methods
- Literature review of social bot types, activity and impact, and detection methods, including supervised, unsupervised, and adversarial approaches.
- Case study of Botometer, a supervised Random Forest classifier using over 1,000 features, plus a user experience survey recruited from Botometer website visitors between August and October 2018, yielding 731 usable answers.
- Interpretability and retraining analysis: Platt scaling for calibration, Bernstein polynomial (40th-degree) density fits for likelihoods, Bayesian CAP with prior P(Bot)=0.15, and expanded training datasets with new features.
Limitations
- Stated: the user survey has self-selection bias because respondents tend to be active Botometer users; some survey questions were optional.
- Stated: there is no objective, agreed-upon operational definition of a social bot and no ground truth, with many accounts in a gray area; supervised methods perform poorly on coordinated bots posting human-generated content, and unsupervised coordination methods can check only a single feature and may require quadratic account pairs.
- Stated/evident: CAP depends on an informed prior P(Bot)=0.15 rather than sample-specific prevalence; algorithmic bias and limited interpretability remain concerns, and the survey sample is not externally validated beyond Botometer visitors.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 34 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingnone given§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11
Most uncalibrated bot scores fall near the middle of the unit interval.
“this is because most uncalibrated bot scores fall near the middle of the unit interval.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11
In the calibrated model, each bin has approximately the same number of scores.
“The flatter red line in the plot shows that each bin has approximately the same number of scores in the calibrated model.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8
Over 80% of users believe Botometer is accurate in classifying bots and humans.
“Second, over 80% of the users believe Botometer is accurate in classifying bots and humans (Figure 2B).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
- Findingreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 9
Despite an explanation offered on the website, the confusion persisted.
“Despite an explanation offered on the website, the confusion persisted.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Early user feedback is representative of typical users' misinterpretations of bot scores.
- Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 9
Judging from early user feedback, incorrect interpretations of bot scores as probabilities or percent automation were prevalent.
“Judging from early user feedback, such incorrect interpretations were prevalent.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Early user feedback is representative of typical users' misinterpretations of bot scores.
- Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8
More than one third of survey participants use Botometer at least weekly.
“First, more than one third of participants use Botometer at least weekly, implying that detecting bots is becoming a recurring need for at least some users (Figure 2A).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
- Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8
Over 80% of users find the bot scores presented by Botometer easy to understand.
“Third, over 80% of the users find the bot scores presented by Botometer easy to understand (Figure 2C).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
- Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8
Users seem to be equally worried by false positives and false negatives.
“Finally, users seem to be equally worried by false positives (humans misclassified as bots) and false negatives (bots misclassified as humans) as shown in Figure 2D.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
- Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8
Occasional users care more about false positives.
“Figure 3 shows that occasional users care more about false positives.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
- Findingnone given§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 14
The training data does not include information on how common bots are in the wild.
“This is necessary because the training data does not include information on how common bots are in the wild.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13
Three different fitting algorithms (maximum-likelihood, method of moments, negative loglikelihood) all failed to produce adequate fits for Beta distribution.
“One well-known candidate meeting this criterion is the Beta distribution.”
- Also stated in: § 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13 · plain
“However, three different fitting algorithms (maximum-likelihood, method of moments, and negative loglikelihood) all failed to produce adequate fits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13 · plain
- Findingown data§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13
A 40th-degree Bernstein polynomial fit produced satisfactory results.
“Experiments showed that a 40th-degree polynomial fit produced satisfactory results (Figure 6).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 14
The posterior probability (CAP) is generally more conservative than the calibrated bot score, reflecting the relative rarity of bots.
“As shown in Figure 6, this probability is generally more conservative than the calibrated bot score, reflecting the relative rarity of bots.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
Models tend to generalize better when classifying human accounts.
“But models tend to generalize better when classifying human accounts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
Novel datasets used for testing, in general, lead to lower performance compared to when models can learn from those instances.
“Novel datasets used for testing, in general, lead to lower performance compared to when models can learn from those instances.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13
Binning as density estimation proved unsuitable because quantization artifacts in Botometer classifier output lead to discontinuities in density functions.
“However, this approach proved unsuitable because quantization artifacts in the Botometer classifier output lead to discontinuities in the density functions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
Bot instances with similar data used for training the model, such as spam bots, also yield better generalization.
“Bot instances with similar data used for training the model, such as spam bots, also yield better generalization.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
The most significant gain is observed by adding training data about porn bots, which have very few tweets and realistic profile details.
“The most significant gain is observed by adding training data about porn bots, which have very few tweets and realistic profile details.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
The current model trained with the new features and on the new datasets improved the cross-validation accuracy from 0.95 to 0.97 AUC.
“Overall, the current model trained with the new features and on the new datasets improved the cross-validation accuracy from 0.95 to 0.97 AUC.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisenone given§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Accounts in the gray area between human and bot behavior exist, where even experienced researchers cannot easily discriminate.
“One of the factors that explain this is the prevalence of accounts that lie in the gray area between human and bot behavior, where even experienced researchers cannot easily discriminate.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Supervised methods do not perform well at detecting coordinated social bots that post human-generated content.
“While supervised methods have proven to be effective in many cases, they do not perform well at detecting coordinated social bots that post human-generated content (Cresci et al., 2017; Grimme et al., 2018; Chen and Subramanian, 2018).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Cresci et al., 2017
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Grimme et al., 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Chen and Subramanian, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Six broad categories of features are relevant for discriminating between human and bot accounts: user metadata, friend metadata, retweet/mention network structure, content and language, sentiment, and temporal features.
“in general six broad categories of features have been identified as relevant for discriminating between human and bot accounts (Varol et al., 2018): user metadata, friend metadata, retweet/mention network structure, content and language, sentiment, and temporal features.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Varol et al., 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisereasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 10
Proper contextualization of raw classifier output requires comparison to the rest of the scores in the training set.
“Proper contextualization of the raw classifier output requires comparison to the rest of the scores in the training set.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ 1 Introduction · p. 2
Social bots that go undetected by platforms have become increasingly sophisticated and human-like.
“Social bots that go undected by platforms have become increasingly sophisticated and human-like (Varol et al., 2017a)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Varol et al., 2017a
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisereasoning§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Coordinated social bots are not usually suspicious when considered individually.
“As mentioned earlier, those coordinated bots are not usually suspicious when considered individually.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Detection of coordinated social bots requires information about their coordination, available only once multiple bots are considered.
“Their detection requires information about their coordination, which becomes available only once the activity of multiple bots is considered.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisenone given§ 1 Introduction · p. 2
Social bots continuously evolve in response to efforts by platforms to eliminate them.
“Part of the difficulty in learning to recognize bots is that they continuously evolve in response to efforts by platforms to eliminate them.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisenone given§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 10
The raw output of the random forest classifier is not a probability.
“As previously described, the raw output of the random forest classifier is not a probability.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Using training labels as proxies for ground truth makes it possible to build practically viable bot detection tools.
“Nevertheless, datasets do include many typical bots; using the training labels as proxies for ground truth makes it possible to build practically viable tools (Davis et al., 2016; Varol et al., 2017a).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Davis et al., 2016
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Varol et al., 2017a
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11
Users presented with a single uncalibrated bot score are misled into perceiving uncertainty about classification of most accounts because they do not know most scores fall into a narrow range.
“Since users, when presented with a single uncalibrated bot score, do not know that most scores fall into this relatively narrow range, they are misled into perceiving uncertainty about classification of most accounts.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Early user feedback is representative of typical users' misinterpretations of bot scores.
- Interpretationreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 9
The interpretation of the bot score as the fraction of trees that classify an account as a bot is obscure to the typical user, who is unlikely to have background knowledge in machine learning.
“This interpretation of the bot score is obscure to the typical user, who is unlikely to have background knowledge in machine learning.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ 1 Introduction · p. 2
Many people are not confident in their ability to identify social bots.
“Despite high awareness, the survey also reveals that many people are not confident in their ability to identify social bots.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Stocking and Sumida, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisereasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11
The calibrated score cannot reflect the low background probability of a randomly selected account being automated because it is a likelihood estimation based on roughly balanced training datasets.
“The calibrated score cannot reflect this fact, since it is a likelihood estimation based on our roughly balanced (half humans, half bots) training datasets.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6
Existing bot detection datasets lack ground truth.
“A critical issue with existing datasets is the lack of ground truth.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 12
The rarer the bots, the higher the score needed to have confidence that an account is a bot.
“In our case, the rarer the bots, the higher the score needed to have confidence that an account is a bot.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16
The present framework seems flexible enough to accommodate the learning of new examples without forgetting the old ones.
“In other words, the present framework seems flexible enough to accommodate the learning of new examples without forgetting the old ones.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13
The failure of Beta distribution fits is likely due to the shape of the P(S|Human) curve, with its mode near, but not at, zero.
“This is likely due to the shape of the P ( S | Human) curve, with its mode near, but not at, zero.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 12
Raw, uncalibrated scores are used in posterior probability calculations.
“Therefore we use raw, uncalibrated scores in our calculations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 12
A calibrated model still lacks the background level of bots in the population necessary to answer whether an account is a bot.
“a calibrated model still lacks one additional piece of information necessary to answer this 'bot or not' question: the background level of bots in the population.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 12
The ratio P(S|Bot)/P(S) is not affected by transformations of S as done in model calibration.
“Since this is a ratio of functions of the score S , it is not affected by transformations of S as done in model calibration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20
Social bot detection systems are not immune to the problem of algorithmic bias.
“Social bot detection systems are not immune to the problem of algorithmic bias.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 43
- May combine two claims. 19
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingreasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11The calibration mapping shifts scores within the unit interval but preserves order, leaving AUC unchanged.
“Note that this mapping shifts scores within the unit interval but preserves order, therefore leaving the AUC unchanged.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8The Botometer website receives over 500 daily visits.
“while the website receives over 500 daily visits.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8Botometer currently handles over a quarter million requests every day.
“Currently, it handles over a quarter million requests every day (Figure 1)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Findingreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8Frequent users care more about false negatives.
“On the other hand, frequent users care more about false negatives.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 10Users seem to appreciate the changes in score presentation, as shown in Figure 4.
“Users seem to appreciate these changes, as shown in Figure 4.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Findingnone given§ Abstract · p. 1A user experience survey suggests that bot detection has become an integral part of the social media experience for many users.
“A user experience survey suggests that bot detection has become an integral part of the social media experience for many users.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16The addition of datasets about unseen classes of bots in the training data does not seem to degrade model performance; accuracy remains high across models trained on increasingly richer datasets.
“We note that the addition of datasets about unseen classes of bots in the training data does not seem to degrade model performance: the accuracy remains high across models trained on increasingly richer datasets.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingnone given§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 14Several bot datasets collected by colleagues in academia have been included in Botometer's training data in the past few years.
“In the past few years, several bot datasets collected by colleagues in academia have been included in our training data.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).
Findingnone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Many machine learning algorithms, including those used by Botometer, do not make it easy to interpret their classifications.
“Unfortunately, many machine learning algorithms, including those used by Botometer, do not make it easy to interpret their classifications.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingreasoning§ 5 Updating detection models · p. 16The list of features employed by Botometer was recently enriched to incorporate new ones designed to capture bots employed in information operations.
“In light of journalistic evidence and other academic research, the list of features employed by Botometer was recently enriched to incorporate new ones that are designed to capture bots employed in information operations.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).
Interpretationreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 7This capacity depends on the ability to engage the public and collect feedback.
“This, in turn, depends on the ability to engage the public and collect the feedback it provides.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).
Interpretationreasoning§ Abstract · p. 1The arms race between machine learning methods to develop sophisticated bots and effective countermeasures makes it necessary to update the training data and features of detection tools.
“The arms race between machine learning methods to develop sophisticated bots and effective countermeasures makes it necessary to update the training data and features of detection tools.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationreasoning§ 1 Introduction · p. 2There is an arms race between bot creators and the research community.
“introducing an arms race between bot creators and the research community.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 7Botometer is based on a supervised machine learning approach.
“Botometer is based on a supervised machine learning approach (Davis et al., 2016; Varol et al., 2017a).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Davis et al., 2016
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Varol et al., 2017a
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationnone given§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 12Model calibration makes bot scores easier to interpret.
“While model calibration makes the bot scores easier to interpret”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).
Interpretationnone given§ Abstract · p. 1Barriers in interpreting the output of AI tools can lead to fundamental misunderstandings.
“However, barriers in interpreting the output of AI tools can lead to fundamental misunderstandings.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Early user feedback is representative of typical users' misinterpretations of bot scores.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Premisenone given§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6There is no objective, agreed-upon, operational definition of social bot.
“There is no objective, agreed-upon, operational definition of social bot.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown data§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8Usable answers were collected from 731 survey participants.
“We collected usable answers from 731 participants; they are listed in Figure 2 together with the questions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 10The threshold approach is useful for scientists counting bots in a collection, but not intuitive for humans evaluating a single account.
“This threshold approach is useful for scientists counting bots in a collection (Su´ arez-Serrato et al., 2016; Haustein et al., 2016; Gorwa, 2017; Stella et al., 2018; Shao et al., 2018a), but it is not intuitive for humans evaluating a single account.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 7Botometer's bot score is intended to be used with English-language accounts because some features are based on English-language content.
“Because some of the features are based on English-language content, the bot score is intended to be used with Englishlanguage accounts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisereasoning§ 4.1 Model calibration · p. 10For two accounts A and B with classifier scores x<y, one can say A is less likely to be a bot than B, but cannot say A is x% likely to be a bot.
“Here we can say that account A is less likely to be a bot than account B , but we cannot say that account A is x % likely to be a bot.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 8The authors are aware of self-selection bias, as respondents tend to be active users of Botometer.
“Although these numbers are encouraging, we are aware of self-selection bias, as respondents of the survey tend to be active users of Botometer.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 1 Introduction · p. 2As many as 9-15% of active Twitter accounts were estimated to be bots in 2017.
“as many as 9-15% of active Twitter accounts were estimated to be bots in 2017 (Varol et al., 2017a)”
- Also stated in: § 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11 · hedged
“the percentage of bot accounts is estimated around 915% (Varol et al., 2017a)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Varol et al., 2017a
Not checked in the free run.
- Also stated in: § 4.1 Model calibration · p. 11 · hedged
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Interpretationnone given§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 7Research efforts aimed at bot detection may be valuable to mitigate undesired consequences, but their efficacy is limited by limited public awareness and unwillingness to adopt sophisticated tools.
“Research efforts aimed at bot detection may be valuable to mitigate the undesired consequences of bot activity, but their efficacy is limited by two factors: limited public awareness of the bot problem, and unwillingness to adopt sophisticated tools to combat it.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationreasoning§ 3 User engagement with bot detection tools · p. 7The success of bot detection research critically depends on the capacity to adapt to ever changing and increasingly sophisticated artificial accounts.
“The success of research efforts also critically depends on the capacity to adapt to ever changing and increasingly sophisticated artificial accounts.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 2.3 Bot detection methods · p. 6Supervised machine learning approaches are the most common for bot detection.
“Approaches based on supervised machine learning algorithms are the most common (Subrahmanian et al., 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Subrahmanian et al., 2016
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Premisenone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19These techniques can provide solutions for specific problems, such as addressing the shortage of human-labeled training data on bot activity and analyzing online sentiment.
“These techniques can provide solutions for specific problems, such as addressing the shortage of humanlabeled training data on bot activity and analyzing online sentiment.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Media literacy efforts may be critical in the fight against online manipulation.
“Media literacy efforts may be critical in this respect (Lazer et al., 2018).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Lazer et al., 2018
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Premisereasoning§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Recent events, including election manipulations, have led to loud public calls for platforms to apply stricter safeguards against abuse and for policymakers to enact regulations of social media platforms in several countries.
“Recent events, including election manipulations discussed in Section 2.2, have led to loud public calls for platforms to apply stricter safeguards against abuse and for policymakers to enact regulations of social media platform in several countries.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20As AI systems employ more sophisticated learning methodologies, model complexity increases and systems become vulnerable to overlooked biases.
“As AI systems employ more sophisticated learning methodologies, model complexity increases and systems become vulnerable to overlooked biases (Kirkpatrick, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Kirkpatrick, 2016
Not checked in the free run.
The quote only partly states this claim.
Interpretationreasoning§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19Only narrow groups of bots that coordinate in specific ways can be captured by unsupervised methods that check a single feature.
“As a result, only narrow groups of bots that coordinate in specific ways can be captured.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisenone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19So far, the technical response to increasingly sophisticated bots has largely focused on increased sophistication in detection approaches.
“So far, the technical response to increasingly sophisticated bots has largely focused on increased sophistication in detection approaches.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 13KDE commonly-used implementations assume unbounded support, and since bot score support is unit interval, KDE leads to biased estimates near interval boundaries.
“Since the support of our distribution is necessarily the unit interval, the use of KDEin this case leads to biased estimates near the interval boundaries (Leblanc, 2012).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Leblanc, 2012
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Algorithmic interpretability would make it easier to spot biases, and a recent European Union regulation grants users the right to ask for an explanation of an algorithmic decision made about them.
“Algorithmic interpretability would make it easier to spot such biases, and in fact a recent European Union regulation grants users the right to ask for an explanation of an algorithmic decision that was made about them (Goodman and Flaxman, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Goodman and Flaxman, 2016
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 14Failure to take the prior into account leads one to overestimate the number of bots in a sample due to humans being more common than bots, leading to false positives outnumbering false negatives.
“Failure to take the prior into account leads one to overestimate the number of bots in a sample due to humans being more common than bots, leading to false positives outnumbering false negatives.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Machine learning is playing a growing role in decision making on issues of broad societal importance.
“Machine learning is playing a growing role in decision making on issues of broad societal importance (Munoz et al., 2016; Barocas and Selbst, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Munoz et al., 2016
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Barocas and Selbst, 2016
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18There are great examples of bots providing valuable services to social media users.
“Despite all the nefarious uses of social bots, there are great examples of bots providing valuable services to social media users (Mønsted et al., 2017).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Mønsted et al., 2017
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationreasoning§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Models trained on manually annotated data might inherit the biases of annotators.
“Models trained on manually annotated data might inherit the biases of annotators.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Some deep-learning methodologies have already demonstrated a capability to surpass human performance on various tasks, such as face recognition and game playing.
“Some of these methodologies have already demonstrated a capability to surpass human performance on various tasks, such as face recognition and game playing (Mnih et al., 2015; Taigman et al., 2014).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Mnih et al., 2015
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Taigman et al., 2014
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationreasoning§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Successful implementation and further advances of these deep-learning technologies can pose serious threats, since discriminating between organic human behavior and automation is likely to become more and more challenging, even for experts.
“Successful implementation and further advances of these technologies can pose serious threats, since discriminating between organic human behavior and automation is likely to become a more and more challenging task, even for experts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisenone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19Unsupervised methods have proven effective at identifying some coordinated bots with high precision, but they can only check a single feature.
“While the unsupervised methods reviewed in Section 2.3 have proven effective at identifying some coordinated bots with high precision, they can only check a single feature.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 4.2 Complete automation probability · p. 14Botometer uses P(Bot)=0.15, corresponding to a previously published estimate of the proportion of bots on Twitter.
“Botometer uses P (Bot) = 0 . 15, corresponding to a previously published estimate of the proportion of bots on Twitter (Varol et al., 2017a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Varol et al., 2017a
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Deep-learning methods are even more challenging than other machine learning methods with respect to interpretability.
“Deep-learning methods are even more challenging in this respect.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 19A recent California law requires online bots to identify themselves as such when they interact with humans, for example promoting a political candidate during elections.
“The latter question is attracting significant attention following a recent California law requiring online bots to identify themselves as such when they interact with humans, for example promoting a political candidate during elections (Sacharoff, 2018).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Sacharoff, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Aggressive suspension of abusive bots that spread false or misleading political content has been criticized by some politicians as censorship, and research on bot detection has been targeted by partisan attacks and labeled as suppression of free speech.
“For example, aggressive suspension of abusive bots that spread false or misleading political content has been criticized by some politicians as censorship (Kang and Frenkel, 2018; Tynan, 2018); even research on bot detection has been targeted by partisan attacks and labeled as suppression of free speech (Mervis, 2014).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Kang and Frenkel, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Tynan, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Mervis, 2014
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationnone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20The iterative process of detecting novel accounts by expanding training datasets is an effective approach but requires extensive and continual manual efforts.
“The iterative process of detecting novel accounts by expanding training datasets, presented in Section 5, is an effective approach but requires extensive and continual manual efforts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisereasoning§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19Recently proposed tools for social bot detection employ deep learning, evolutionary algorithms, and unsupervised learning.
“As reviewed in Section 2.3, recently proposed tools for social bot detection employ deep learning, evolutionary algorithms, and unsupervised learning.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Premisereasoning§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Platforms are under increasing pressure from politicians, even though they are in theory free to police their systems according to their own terms of service and community standards.
“While platforms are in theory free to police their systems according to their own terms of service and community standards, they are under increasing pressure from politicians.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Premisenone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Much public debate revolves around how humans will interact with artificial intelligence.
“Much public debate revolves around how humans will interact with artificial intelligence.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Recent developments of deep-learning models create opportunities to employ sequence-to-sequence models for automatic conversations, deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors, and generative adversarial networks for creating fake profile images and content.
“Recent developments of deep-learning models create opportunities to employ sequence-to-sequence models for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative adversarial networks for creating fake profile images and content (Goodfellow et al., 2014; Zhao et al., 201”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Li et al., 2015, 2016
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Mnih et al., 2015
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Goodfellow et al., 2014
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ 6.1 Future of social bots · p. 18Deep-learning approaches can be used to detect sentiment online, allowing the next generation of social bots to be more perceptive about human emotions.
“Deep-learning approaches can also be used to detect sentiment online (Socher et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Severyn and Moschitti, 2015), allowing the next generation of social bots to be more perceptive about human emotions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Socher et al., 2013
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Tang et al., 2014
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Severyn and Moschitti, 2015
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 19Another research challenge relevant for dismantling coordinated bot attacks is the detection of promoted campaigns at their early stages.
“Another research challenge that could be relevant for the dismantling of coordinated bot attacks is the detection of promoted campaigns at their early stages (Ferrara et al., 2016b; Varol et al., 2017b).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Ferrara et al., 2016b
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Varol et al., 2017b
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Premisenone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Botometer employs an ensemble model to learn complex rules able to recognize multiple types of bot behavioral patterns.
“Botometer employs an ensemble model to learn complex rules able to recognize multiple types of bot behavioral patterns.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Interpretationnone given§ 6.2 Future of AI countermeasures · p. 20Because of the significant financial and political incentives for developing benign and malicious social bots, this domain provides a concrete and realistic scenario to imagine the future of both collaborative and adversarial human-bot interactions.
“Because of the significant financial and political incentives for developing benign and malicious social bots, this domain provides us with a concrete and realistic scenario to imagine the future of both collaborative and adversarial human-bot interactions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Survey respondents are representative enough of Botometer users or the public to infer user needs and interactions, despite self-selection bias.
“Although these numbers are encouraging, we are aware of self-selection bias, as respondents of the survey tend to be active users of Botometer.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Early user feedback is representative of typical users' misinterpretations of bot scores.
“Judging from early user feedback, such incorrect interpretations were prevalent.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The model's training data provides empirical score distributions representative of the population of accounts to which the Complete Automation Probability is applied.
“The model's training data provides empirical distributions of scores for both humans and bots (Figure 6); density estimation can be used to find a probability density function likely to produce a particular empirical distribution.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A supervised machine learning tool is only as good as the data used for its training.
“A supervised machine learning tool is only as good as the data used for its training.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Social bots evolve rapidly, and even the most advanced algorithms will fail with outdated training datasets.
“Social bots evolve rapidly, and even the most advanced algorithms will fail with outdated training datasets.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Methods designed to detect sophisticated social bots tend to overlook coordinated behaviors, and vice versa.
“For example, methods designed to detect sophisticated social bots tend to overlook coordinated behaviors, and vice versa [19].”
From A language framework for modeling social media account behavior (2023) · cites this paper as [19]
Section 2.3 (p. 6) says supervised methods often fail to detect coordinated bots because their individual accounts do not look suspicious. Section 6.2 (p. 19) says coordination-focused unsupervised methods capture only narrow groups of bots, but it does not establish the reverse claim that they tend to overlook sophisticated bots specifically. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe accounts were collected and labeled by multiple researchers between 2017-2019.
“These accounts were collected and labeled by multiple researchers between 2017-2019 [19].”
From A language framework for modeling social media account behavior (2023) · cites this paper as [19]
The Acknowledgements (p. 20) name several people who collected datasets, and the training-data table (p. 15) identifies some accounts as manually labeled. Neither passage establishes that the accounts were collected and labeled by multiple researchers between 2017 and 2019; the dates in Table 2 describe Botometer model activity periods, not account collection or labeling dates. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAutomated accounts exhibit distinctive temporal, linguistic, and network signatures.
“A decade of research on social bot detection 13-15 has established that automated accounts exhibit distinctive temporal, linguistic, and network signatures 14,31 .”
From The Moltbook Illusion: Separating Human Influence from Emergent Behavior in AI Agent Societies (2026) · cites this paper as [31]
Traditional social bots often follow pre-defined instructions to perform simplistic tasks, such as spamming, following others, and amplifying certain narratives.
“Traditional social bots often follow pre-defined instructions to perform simplistic tasks, such as spamming (Yang et al., 2019), following others, and amplifying certain narratives (Keller et al., 2020).”
From Anatomy of an AI-powered malicious social botnet (2024) · cites this paper as Yang et al., 2019
Researchers commonly adopt the supervised approach where examples of bot and human accounts are collected for training classifiers.
“Researchers commonly adopt the supervised approach where examples of bot and human accounts are collected for training classifiers (Yang et al., 2019;Sayyadiharikandeh et al., 2020).”
From Anatomy of an AI-powered malicious social botnet (2024) · cites this paper as Yang et al., 2019
Botometer evaluates possible bots using more than 1,200 features of an account.
“By leveraging more than 1,200 features of an account, Botometer evaluates possible bots based on their profile characteristics, social network structure, the content they produce, their sentiment expressions, and the timings of their actions [35].”
From A decade of social bot detection (2020) · cites this paper as [35]
The current version of Botometer is often considered the state-of-the-art method for bot detection.
“The first baseline is the current version of Botometer, often considered the state-of-the-art method for bot detection [48].”
From Detection of Novel Social Bots by Ensembles of Specialized Classifiers (2020) · cites this paper as [48]
Retraining supervised models to address lack of generalization requires new labeled datasets.
“One common approach to address the lack of generalization is to retrain models with new labeled datasets [48].”
From Detection of Novel Social Bots by Ensembles of Specialized Classifiers (2020) · cites this paper as [48]
The extracted features are effective in identifying social bots.
“These features are shown to be effective in identifying social bots and are described in detail in the literature [42, 43, 48].”
From Detection of Novel Social Bots by Ensembles of Specialized Classifiers (2020) · cites this paper as [48]
Bots change and evolve continuously to evade detection, so supervised learning algorithms need to adapt to new classes of bots.
“since bots change and evolve continuously to evade detection, supervised learning algorithms need to adapt to new classes of bots [21, 44, 48].”
From Detection of Novel Social Bots by Ensembles of Specialized Classifiers (2020) · cites this paper as [48]
Cites
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Botometer is based on Random Forest classifiers (Breiman, 2001).”
BackgroundMethodHuman-level control through deep reinforcement learning
Mnih, V., Kavukcuoglu, K., Silver, D., Rusu, A. A., Veness, J., Bellemare, M. G., Graves, A., Riedmiller, M., Fidjeland, A. K., Ostrovski, G., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14236 · Cited by 30,357 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…sequence-to-sequence models for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative adversarial networks for creating fake profile images and content (Goodfellow…”
BackgroundGAN(Generative Adversarial Nets)
淳司, 柴. (2017) · Journal of Japan Society for Fuzzy Theory and Intelligent Informatics · doi:10.3156/jsoft.29.5_177_2 · Cited by 19,268 · see citing works
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In the past four years, Botometer has constantly increased its basin of adoption, and has provided data for a number of influential studies, including by Vosoughi et al. (2018) and the Pew Research Center (Wo-jcik et al., 2018).”
BackgroundRecursive Deep Models for Semantic Compositionality Over a Sentiment Treebank
Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J., Chuang, J., Manning, C. D., Ng, A., & Potts, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d13-1170 · Cited by 6,878 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Deep-learning approaches can also be used to detect sentiment online (Socher et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Severyn and Moschitti, 2015), allowing the next generation of social bots to be more perceptive about human emotions.”
BackgroundDeepFace: Closing the Gap to Human-Level Performance in Face Verification
Taigman, Y., Yang, M., Ranzato, M., & Wolf, L. (2014) · 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2014.220 · Cited by 6,542 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Some of these methodologies have already demonstrated a capability to surpass human performance on various tasks, such as face recognition and game playing (Mnih et al., 2015; Taigman et al., 2014).”
BackgroundLazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao2998 · Cited by 4,160 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Media literacy efforts may be critical in this respect (Lazer et al., 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationBarocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2477899 · Cited by 3,048 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Machine learning is playing a growing role in decision making on issues of broad societal importance (Munoz et al., 2016; Barocas and Selbst, 2016).”
BackgroundEuropean Union Regulations on Algorithmic Decision Making and a “Right to Explanation”
Goodman, B., & Flaxman, S. (2017) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v38i3.2741 · Cited by 2,131 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Algorithmic interpretability would make it easier to spot such biases, and in fact a recent European Union regulation grants users the right to ask for an explanation of an algorithmic decision that was made about them (Goodman and Flaxman, 2016).”
BackgroundA Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Models
Li, J., Galley, M., Brockett, C., Gao, J., & Dolan, B. (2016) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/n16-1014 · Cited by 1,981 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recent developments of deep-learning models create opportunities to employ sequence-to-sequence models for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative…”
MethodFerrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2016) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/2818717 · Cited by 1,973 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Another research challenge that could be relevant for the dismantling of coordinated bot attacks is the detection of promoted campaigns at their early stages (Ferrara et al., 2016b; Varol et al., 2017b).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationPredicting good probabilities with supervised learning
Niculescu-Mizil, A., & Caruana, R. (2005) · Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning - ICML '05 · doi:10.1145/1102351.1102430 · Cited by 1,884 · cited 1× · see citing works
“To calibrate Botometer, we employed Platt’s scaling (Niculescu-Mizil and Caruana, 2005), a logistic regression model trained on classifier outputs.”
MethodLearning Sentiment-Specific Word Embedding for Twitter Sentiment Classification
Tang, D., Wei, F., Yang, N., Zhou, M., Liu, T., & Qin, B. (2014) · Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.3115/v1/p14-1146 · Cited by 1,181 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Deep-learning approaches can also be used to detect sentiment online (Socher et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Severyn and Moschitti, 2015), allowing the next generation of social bots to be more perceptive about human emotions.”
BackgroundJagatic, T. N., Johnson, N. A., Jakobsson, M., & Menczer, F. (2007) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1290958.1290968 · Cited by 1,156 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Unlike other social engineering attacks, such as spear phishing (Jagatic et al., 2007), bots can achieve scalability through automation.”
BackgroundSelf-citationWeaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate
Broniatowski, D. A., Jamison, A. M., Qi, S., AlKulaib, L., Chen, T., Benton, A., Quinn, S. C., & Dredze, M. (2018) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304567 · Cited by 1,149 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Health is one domain of particular concern (Allem and Ferrara, 2018), where we have observed social bots influencing debates about vaccination policies (Ferrara et al., 2016a; Broniatowski et al., 2018) and smoking (Allem and Ferrara, 2016; Allem et al.”
BackgroundThe spread of low-credibility content by social bots
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7 · Cited by 1,125 · cited 2× · see citing works
“A study based on 14 million tweets posted during and after the 2016 U.S. presidential election revealed that bots played a key role in the spread of low-credibility content (Shao et al., 2018a,b).”
BackgroundSelf-citationSocial bots distort the 2016 U.S. Presidential election online discussion
Bessi, A., & Ferrara, E. (2016) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v21i11.7090 · Cited by 993 · cited 3× · see citing works
“Our analysis (Bessi and Ferrara, 2016) suggests that retweets were a vulnerable mode of information spreading: there was no significant difference in the amount of retweets that humans generated by resharing content produced by other humans or by bots.”
InfluentialSelf-citationOnline Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization
Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Davis, C., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2017) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v11i1.14871 · Cited by 928 · cited 20× · see citing works
“A recent report 2 revealed that reality television stars, professional athletes, comedians, TED speakers, pastors, and fashion models all purchased fake followers on Twitter at least once.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationBotOrNot: A System to Evaluate Social Bots
Davis, C. A., Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2016) · Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web - WWW 16 Companion · doi:10.1145/2872518.2889302 · Cited by 909 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Botometer is based on a supervised machine learning approach (Davis et al., 2016; Varol et al., 2017a).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationA Persona-Based Neural Conversation Model
Li, J., Galley, M., Brockett, C., Spithourakis, G., Gao, J., & Dolan, B. (2016) · Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p16-1094 · Cited by 898 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recent developments of deep-learning models create opportunities to employ sequence-to-sequence models for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative…”
MethodMorris, M., & Ogan, C. (1996) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01460.x · Cited by 674 · see citing works
Twitter Sentiment Analysis with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks
Severyn, A., & Moschitti, A. (2015) · International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) · doi:10.1145/2766462.2767830 · Cited by 673 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Deep-learning approaches can also be used to detect sentiment online (Socher et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Severyn and Moschitti, 2015), allowing the next generation of social bots to be more perceptive about human emotions.”
BackgroundScience vs Conspiracy: Collective Narratives in the Age of Misinformation
Bessi, A., Coletto, M., Davidescu, G. A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118093 · Cited by 645 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The spread of fake news online is another area in which the effect of bots is believed to be relevant (Lazer et al., 2018; Bessi et al., 2015).”
BackgroundThe Comparison and Evaluation of Forecasters
DeGroot, M. H., & Fienberg, S. E. (1983) · The Statistician · doi:10.2307/2987588 · Cited by 604 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The figure also shows reliability diagrams for raw and calibrated scores (DeGroot and Fienberg, 1983).”
BackgroundDetecting and Tracking Political Abuse in Social Media
Ratkiewicz, J., Conover, M., Meiss, M., Gonçalves, B., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14127 · Cited by 580 · cited 1× · see citing works
“During the 2010 U.S. midterm elections, primitive social bots were found to support some candidates and attack their opponents (Metaxas and Mustafaraj, 2012), injecting thousands of tweets pointing to websites with fake news (Ratkiewicz et al., 2011).”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe spread of low-credibility content by social bots
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 574 · see citing works
Self-citationDisinformation and social bot operations in the run up to the 2017 French presidential election
Ferrara, E. (2017) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v22i8.8005 · Cited by 524 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Our analysis highlighted the presence of Twitter bots during the 2017 French Presidential Election (Ferrara, 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDeep neural networks for bot detection
Kudugunta, S., & Ferrara, E. (2018) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2018.08.019 · Cited by 506 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recently, Kudugunta and Ferrara (2018) proposed a deep neural network approach based on the contextual long short-term memory (LSTM) architecture that exploits content and metadata to detect bots at the tweet level.”
BackgroundSelf-citationBots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory content in online social systems
Stella, M., Ferrara, E., & De Domenico, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1803470115 · Cited by 492 · cited 3× · see citing works
“Similar cases of political manipulation were reported in other countries (Stella et al., 2018).”
BackgroundResultSelf-citationThe DARPA Twitter Bot Challenge
Subrahmanian, V. S., Azaria, A., Durst, S., Kagan, V., Galstyan, A., Lerman, K., Zhu, L., Ferrara, E., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2016) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2016.183 · Cited by 480 · cited 2× · see citing works
“will at essentially no cost, human detectors cannot. Later eorts therefore mostly leveraged machine learning methods. Approaches based on supervised machine learning algorithms are the most common (Subrahmanian et al., 2016). Supervised approaches depend and often start with the collection of an extensive dataset, wit…”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationFame for sale: Efficient detection of fake Twitter followers
Cresci, S., Di Pietro, R., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tesconi, M. (2015) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.09.003 · Cited by 461 · cited 3× · see citing works
“A more extreme example of these kinds of bots are identity thieves: they copy usernames, profile information, and pictures of other accounts and use them as their own, making only small changes (Cresci et al., 2015).”
BackgroundSeven Months with the Devils: A Long-Term Study of Content Polluters on Twitter
Lee, K., Eoff, B. D., & Caverlee, J. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14106 · Cited by 448 · cited 7× · see citing works
“In 2011, Lee et al. (2011) identified thousands of social bots.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe Paradigm-Shift of Social Spambots: Evidence, Theories, and Tools for the Arms Race
Cresci, S., Di Pietro, R., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tesconi, M. (2017) · Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion - WWW '17 Companion · doi:10.1145/3041021.3055135 · Cited by 381 · cited 2× · see citing works
“While supervised methods have proven to be effective in many cases, they do not perform well at detecting coordinated social bots that post human-generated content (Cresci et al., 2017; Grimme et al., 2018; Chen and Subramanian, 2018).”
BackgroundTwitter spammer detection using data stream clustering
Miller, Z., Dickinson, B., Deitrick, W., Hu, W., & Wang, A. H. (2014) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2013.11.016 · Cited by 332 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Early attempts combined multiple features via Euclidean distance and then applied clustering or network community algorithms (Ahmed and Abu-laish, 2013; Miller et al., 2014).”
Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots
Mønsted, B., Sapieżyński, P., Ferrara, E., & Lehmann, S. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0184148 · Cited by 328 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Despite all the nefarious uses of social bots, there are great examples of bots providing valuable services to social media users (Mønsted et al., 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationAnatomy of an online misinformation network
Shao, C., Hui, P.-M., Wang, L., Jiang, X., Flammini, A., Menczer, F., & Ciampaglia, G. L. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196087 · Cited by 282 · cited 4× · see citing works
“which it is classied as human. This threshold approach is useful for scientists counting bots in a collection (Suarez-Serrato et al., 2016; Haustein et al., 2016; Gorwa, 2017; Stella et al., 2018; Shao et al., 2018a), but it is not intuitive for humans evaluating a single account. A calibrated classier C0 is one whose…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationDeBot: Twitter Bot Detection via Warped Correlation
Chavoshi, N., Hamooni, H., & Mueen, A. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM) · doi:10.1109/icdm.2016.0096 · Cited by 260 · cited 6× · see citing works
“The API, whose users tend to be more advanced, also provides uncalibrated scores.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSocial Media and the Elections
Metaxas, P., & Mustafaraj, E. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1230456 · Cited by 245 · cited 1× · see citing works
“During the 2010 U.S. midterm elections, primitive social bots were found to support some candidates and attack their opponents (Metaxas and Mustafaraj, 2012), injecting thousands of tweets pointing to websites with fake news (Ratkiewicz et al., 2011).”
BackgroundThe ISIS Twitter census: defining and describing the population of ISIS supporters on Twitter
Berger, J. M., & Morgan, J. (2015) · Cited by 240 · see citing works
The paradigm-shift of social spambots: Evidence, theories, and tools for the arms race
Cresci, S., Pietro, R. D., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tesconi, M. (2017) · Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1701.03017 · Cited by 237 · cited 2× · see citing works
“While supervised methods have proven to be effective in many cases, they do not perform well at detecting coordinated social bots that post human-generated content (Cresci et al., 2017; Grimme et al., 2018; Chen and Subramanian, 2018).”
BackgroundOnline Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and CharacterizationPreprint
Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Davis, C. A., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1703.03107 · Cited by 232 · cited 20× · see citing works
“A recent report 2 revealed that reality television stars, professional athletes, comedians, TED speakers, pastors, and fashion models all purchased fake followers on Twitter at least once.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationHaustein, S., Bowman, T. D., Holmberg, K., Tsou, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Larivière, V. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23456 · Cited by 231 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This threshold approach is useful for scientists counting bots in a collection (Su´arez-Serrato et al., 2016; Haustein et al., 2016; Gorwa, 2017; Stella et al., 2018; Shao et al., 2018a), but it is not intuitive for humans evaluating a single account.”
BackgroundDesign and analysis of a social botnet
Boshmaf, Y., Muslukhov, I., Beznosov, K., & Ripeanu, M. (2012) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2012.06.006 · Cited by 230 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In particular, over the past 10 years we have witnessed an explosion of social bots (Lee et al., 2011; Boshmaf et al., 2013), a presence that doesn’t show signs of decline.”
BackgroundLokot, T. (2016) · doi:10.1080/21670811.2015.1081822 · Cited by 209 · see citing works
A generic statistical approach for spam detection in Online Social Networks
Ahmed, F., & Abulaish, M. (2013) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2013.04.004 · Cited by 199 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Early attempts combined multiple features via Euclidean distance and then applied clustering or network community algorithms (Ahmed and Abulaish, 2013; Miller et al., 2014).”
A Deep Reinforcement Learning ChatbotPreprint
Serban, I. V., Sankar, C., Germain, M., Zhang, S., Lin, Z., Subramanian, S., Kim, T., Pieper, M., Chandar, S., Ke, N. R., et al. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1709.02349 · Cited by 195 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative adversarial networks for creating fake profile images and content (Goodfellow et al., 2014; Zhao et al., 2017).”
BackgroundDNA-Inspired Online Behavioral Modeling and Its Application to Spambot Detection
Cresci, S., Di Pietro, R., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tesconi, M. (2016) · IEEE Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1109/mis.2016.29 · Cited by 194 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Cresci et al. (2016) encoded tweet type or content as strings of symbols, then considered the longest common substring to detect coordination.”
BackgroundAbokhodair, N., Yoo, D., & McDonald, D. W. (2015) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/2675133.2675208 · Cited by 177 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Abokhodair et al. (2015) dissected a botnet that tried to misdirect the online discussion during the Syrian civil war in 2012.”
BackgroundSocial Turing Tests: Crowdsourcing Sybil DetectionPreprint
Wang, G., Mohanlal, M., Wilson, C., Wang, X., Metzger, M. J., Zheng, H.-T., & Zhao, B. Y. (2012) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1205.3856 · Cited by 173 · cited 2× · see citing works
“An early attempt by Wang et al. (2012) involved building a crowdsourcing social bot detection platform.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialApplication of Bernstein Polynomials for smooth estimation of a distribution and density function
Babu, G. J., Canty, A. J., & Chaubey, Y. P. (2002) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(01)00265-8 · Cited by 171 · cited 2× · see citing works
“duce adequate ts. This is likely due to the shape of the P(S jHuman) curve, with its mode near, but not at, zero. Ultimately we chose a lesser-known family of curves for our t: Bernstein polynomials (Babu et al., 2002). Implementation is straightforward as computing values of a polynomial curve is simple, even one wit…”
MethodResultDissecting a Social Botnet: Growth, Content and Influence in TwitterPreprint
Abokhodair, N., Yoo, D., & McDonald, D. W. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1604.03627 · Cited by 169 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Abokhodair et al. (2015) dissected a botnet that tried to misdirect the online discussion during the Syrian civil war in 2012.”
BackgroundDual-Agent GANs for Photorealistic and Identity Preserving Profile Face Synthesis
Zhao, J. C., Xiong, L., Jayashree, K., Li, J., Zhao, F., Wang, Z., Pranata, P. S., Shen, P. S., Yan, S., & Feng, J. (2017) · neural information processing systems · Cited by 160 · see citing works
$1.00 per RT #BostonMarathon #PrayForBoston: Analyzing fake content on Twitter
Gupta, A., Lamba, H., & Kumaraguru, P. (2013) · doi:10.1109/ecrs.2013.6805772 · Cited by 144 · cited 2× · see citing works
“After the Boston marathon bombing, for example, bots started to automatically retweet indiscriminately, without verifying the credibility of the posts being retweeted or that of their sources (Gupta et al., 2013), unintentionally amplifying the diffusion of misinformation.”
BackgroundMethodE-Cigarette Surveillance With Social Media Data: Social Bots, Emerging Topics, and Trends
Allem, J.-P., Ferrara, E., Uppu, S. P., Cruz, T. B., & Unger, J. B. (2017) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/publichealth.8641 · Cited by 140 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Health is one domain of particular concern (Allem and Ferrara, 2018), where we have observed social bots influencing debates about vaccination policies (Ferrara et al., 2016a; Broniatowski et al., 2018) and smoking (Allem and Ferrara, 2016; Allem et al., 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationReverse Engineering Socialbot Infiltration Strategies in Twitter
Freitas, C. A., Benevenuto, F., Ghosh, S., & Veloso, A. (2015) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) · doi:10.1145/2808797.2809292 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Predicting Online Extremism, Content Adopters, and Interaction Reciprocity
Ferrara, E., Wang, W.-Q., Varol, O., Flammini, A., & Galstyan, A. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47874-6_3 · Cited by 136 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Another research challenge that could be relevant for the dismantling of coordinated bot attacks is the detection of promoted campaigns at their early stages (Ferrara et al., 2016b; Varol et al., 2017b).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationKirkpatrick, K. (2016) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/2983270 · Cited by 136 · cited 1× · see citing works
“As AI systems employ more sophisticated learning methodologies, model complexity increases and systems become vulnerable to overlooked biases (Kirkpatrick, 2016).”
BackgroundSocialbots: voices from the fronts
Hwang, T., Pearce, I., & Nanis, M. (2012) · INTR · doi:10.1145/2090150.2090161 · Cited by 131 · cited 1× · see citing works
“They can even interact with other users by engaging in conversations, commenting on posts, and answering questions (Hwang et al., 2012).”
BackgroundEarly detection of promoted campaigns on social media
Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2017) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-017-0111-y · Cited by 130 · cited 17× · see citing works
“A recent report 2 revealed that reality television stars, professional athletes, comedians, TED speakers, pastors, and fashion models all purchased fake followers on Twitter at least once.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationPerceived social presence reduces fact-checking
Jun, Y., Meng, R., & Johar, G. V. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1700175114 · Cited by 121 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While more traditional nefarious entities, like malware, attack vulnerabilities of hardware and software, social bots exploit human vulnerabilities, such as our tendencies to pay attention to what appears to be popular and to trust social contacts (Jun et al., 2017).”
BackgroundBrenner, A. S. A. J. (2012) · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Could Social Bots Pose a Threat to Public Health?
Allem, J.-P., & Ferrara, E. (2018) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304512 · Cited by 102 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Health is one domain of particular concern (Allem and Ferrara, 2018), where we have observed social bots influencing debates about vaccination policies (Ferrara et al., 2016a; Broniatowski et al., 2018) and smoking (Allem and Ferrara, 2016; Allem et al., 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationOn estimating distribution functions using Bernstein polynomials
Leblanc, A. (2011) · Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10463-011-0339-4 · Cited by 98 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Since the support of our distribution is necessarily the unit interval, the use of KDE in this case leads to biased estimates near the interval boundaries (Leblanc, 2012).”
MethodPeople Are Strange When You're a Stranger: Impact and Influence of Bots on Social Networks
Aiello, L. M., Deplano, M., Schifanella, R., & Ruffo, G. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v6i1.14236 · Cited by 97 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Some bots, for example, search the social networks for popular accounts, follow them, and ask to be followed back (Aiello et al., 2012).”
BackgroundChanging Perspectives: Is It Sufficient to Detect Social Bots?
Grimme, C., Assenmacher, D., & Adam, L. (2018) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91521-0_32 · Cited by 93 · cited 3× · see citing works
“Not surprisingly, hybrid approaches that mix human and automated activity have been devised to bypass bot and bot-coordination detection systems (Grimme et al., 2018).”
BackgroundMethodKey Challenges in Defending Against Malicious Socialbots
Boshmaf, Y., Muslukhov, I., Beznosov, K., & Ripeanu, M. (2012) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3264613 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Detection of Promoted Social Media Campaigns
Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v10i1.14772 · Cited by 68 · cited 8× · see citing works
“They can generate content automatically and interact with human users, often posing as, or imitating, humans (Ferrara et al., 2016a).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationPeople are Strange when you're a Stranger: Impact and Influence of Bots on Social NetworksPreprint
Aiello, L. M., Deplano, M., Schifanella, R., et al. (2014) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1407.8134 · Cited by 58 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Some bots, for example, search the social networks for popular accounts, follow them, and ask to be followed back (Aiello et al., 2012).”
BackgroundDiscovery, Retrieval, and Analysis of the 'Star Wars' Botnet in Twitter
Echeverría, J., & Zhou, S. (2017) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) · doi:10.1145/3110025.3110074 · Cited by 56 · cited 1× · see citing works
“abels usually come from human annotation (Varol et al., 2017a), automated methods (e.g., those based on honey pots described earlier (Lee et al., 2011)), or botnets that display suspicious behaviors (Echeverria and Zhou, 2017a,b). A critical issue with existing datasets is the lack of ground truth. There is no objecti…”
MethodOn the Influence of Social Bots in Online Protests
Suárez–Serrato, P., Roberts, M. E., Davis, C. A., & Menczer, F. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47874-6_19 · Cited by 55 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This threshold approach is useful for scientists counting bots in a collection (Suárez-Serrato et al., 2016; Haustein et al., 2016; Gorwa, 2017; Stella et al., 2018; Shao et al., 2018a), but it is not intuitive for humans evaluating a single account.”
BackgroundSelf-citationAllem, J.-P., & Ferrara, E. (2016) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.6185 · Cited by 53 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Health is one domain of particular concern (Allem and Ferrara, 2018), where we have observed social bots influencing debates about vaccination policies (Ferrara et al., 2016a; Broniatowski et al., 2018) and smoking (Allem and Ferrara, 2016; Allem et al., 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationOn the capability of evolved spambots to evade detection via genetic engineering
Cresci, S., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tognazzi, S. (2018) · Online Social Networks and Media · doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2018.10.005 · Cited by 53 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Cresci et al. (2019) proposed the use of evolutionary algorithms to improve social bot skills.”
BackgroundDeep Reinforcement Learning with a Combinatorial Action Space for Predicting Popular Reddit Threads
He, J., Mari Ostendorf, E., He, X., Chen, J., Gao, J., Li, L., & Deng, L. (2016) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d16-1189 · Cited by 53 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…models for automatic conversations (Li et al., 2015, 2016), deep reinforcement learning for controlling account behaviors (Mnih et al., 2015; He et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2017), and generative adversarial networks for creating fake profile images and content (Goodfellow et al., 2014; Zhao…”
An Unsupervised Approach to Detect Spam Campaigns that Use Botnets on TwitterPreprint
Chen, Z., & Subramanian, D. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1804.05232 · Cited by 44 · cited 2× · see citing works
“While supervised methods have proven to be effective in many cases, they do not perform well at detecting coordinated social bots that post human-generated content (Cresci et al., 2017; Grimme et al., 2018; Chen and Subramanian, 2018).”
BackgroundMethodWojcik, S., Messing, S., Smith, A. W., Rainie, L., & Hitlin, P. (2018) · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Deception strategies and threats for online discussions
Varol, O., & Uluturk, I. (2018) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v22i5.7883 · Cited by 30 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The deceptive strategies employed on all these types of channels share striking similarities (Varol and Uluturk, 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationFeature Engineering for Social Bot Detection
Varol, O., Davis, C. A., Menczer, F., et al. (2018) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781315181080-12 · Cited by 30 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…have been considered, but in general six broad categories of features have been identified as relevant for discriminating between human and bot accounts (Varol et al., 2018): user metadata, friend metadata, retweet/mention network structure, content and language, sentiment, and temporal features.”
BackgroundSelf-citationCresci, S., Petrocchi, M., Spognardi, A., & Tognazzi, S. (2018) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3184558.3191595 · Cited by 28 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Future efforts should aim for a pro-active approach to mitigate the effects of social bots by engaging with them early (Cresci et al., 2018).”
BackgroundA categorization scheme for socialbot attacks in online social networksPreprint
Mitter, S., Wagner, C., & Strohmaier, M. (2014) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1402.6288 · Cited by 18 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Our recent analysis points to the existence of many distinct types of social bots, such as spam bots, mention bots, cyborgs, and many others (Mitter et al., 2014).”
BackgroundDiscovery of the Twitter Bursty Botnet
Echeverría, J., Besel, C., & Zhou, S. (2018) · Security science and technology · doi:10.1142/9781786345646_007 · Cited by 16 · cited 1× · see citing works
“abels usually come from human annotation (Varol et al., 2017a), automated methods (e.g., those based on honey pots described earlier (Lee et al., 2011)), or botnets that display suspicious behaviors (Echeverria and Zhou, 2017a,b). A critical issue with existing datasets is the lack of ground truth. There is no objecti…”
MethodAn Internet research project draws conservative ire
Mervis, J. D. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.346.6210.686 · Cited by 15 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…suspension of abusive bots that spread false or misleading political content has been criticized by some politicians as censorship (Kang and Frenkel, 2018; Ty-nan, 2018); even research on bot detection has been targeted by partisan attacks and labeled as suppression of free speech (Mervis, 2014).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
8 of the 89 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Goodfellow I. Pouget‐Abadie J. Mirza M. Xu B. Warde‐Farley D. Ozair S. … &Bengio Y.(2014).Generative adversarial nets. Paper presented at the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 (NIPS 2014) Montreal Canada 2672–2680.
- Gorwa R., 2017, Computational propaganda in Poland: False amplifiers and the digital public sphere
- Schroeder J.(2018). Are bots entitled to free speech?Columbia Journalism Review.
- Stocking G., 2018, Social media bots draw public's attention and concern
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2020) · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i01.5460 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
“Such coordination cannot be captured by our feature-based approach (Cresci et al. 2017; Yang et al. 2019).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationBalakrishnan, J., Abed, S. S., & Jones, P. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121692 · Cited by 307 · see citing works
A decade of social bot detection
Cresci, S. (2020) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3409116 · Cited by 323 · see citing works
“By leveraging more than 1,200 features of an account, Botometer evaluates possible bots based on their profile characteristics, social network structure, the content they produce, their sentiment expressions, and the timings of their actions [35].”
BackgroundA survey of Twitter research: Data model, graph structure, sentiment analysis and attacks
Antonakaki, D., Fragopoulou, P., & Ioannidis, S. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114006 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Bots and Misinformation Spread on Social Media: Implications for COVID-19
Himelein-Wachowiak, M., Giorgi, S., Devoto, A., Rahman, M. M., Ungar, L., Schwartz, H. A., Epstein, D. H., Leggio, L., & Curtis, B. L. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26933 · Cited by 238 · see citing works
“Finally, there is a continued arms race between bot-detection algorithms and bot creators [21,33].”
TwiBot-20: A Comprehensive Twitter Bot Detection Benchmark
Feng, S., Wan, H., Wang, N., Li, J., & Luo, M. (2021) · ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) · doi:10.1145/3459637.3482019 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
“Property Semantic Neighbor varol-icwsm [27] pronbots [31] ✓ celebrity [31] ✓ gilani-17 [13] ✓ cresci-rtbust [19] ✓ cresci-stock [7] ✓ midterm-18 [32] ✓ botwiki [32] ✓ verified [32] ✓ PAN-19 3 ✓ caverlee [15] ✓ ✓ cresci-17 [6] ✓ ✓ TwiBot-20 ✓ ✓ ✓ are also encouraged to download and use the full…”
BackgroundMethodInfluential(2020) · Sabanci University · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Self-citationThe False positive problem of automatic bot detection in social science research
Rauchfleisch, A., & Kaiser, J. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0241045 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
“Even though many new bot detection methods are developed every year—outperforming Botometer in some cases—[15, 16, 18], we focus on Botometer as it is by far the most used tool in studies analyzing bots on Twitter [12], especially in social science [5, 7, 10].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialDetection of Novel Social Bots by Ensembles of Specialized Classifiers
Sayyadiharikandeh, M., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2020) · Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/3340531.3412698 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
“WecomparetheESCapproach( Botometer-v4 )withthe Botometer-v3 baseline model [48], as well as the Botometer-v3.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationBotometer 101: social bot practicum for computational social scientists
Yang, K.-C., Ferrara, E., & Menczer, F. (2022) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-022-00177-5 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
“Although Twitter strengthened their efforts to contain malicious actors in recent years, 1 deceptive bots remain prevalent and display evolving tactics to evade detection [34].”
BackgroundSelf-citationGiglietto, F., Righetti, N., Rossi, L., & Marino, G. (2020) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2020.1739732 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
“models to identify the inauthentic accounts (Yang et al., 2019).”
BackgroundA Survey on Computational Propaganda Detection
Martino, G. D. S., Cresci, S., Barrón‐Cedeño, A., Yu, S., Pietro, R. D., & Nakov, P. (2020) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2020/672 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
What types of COVID-19 conspiracies are populated by Twitter bots?
Ferrara, E. (2020) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v25i6.10633 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
“e identification of highly-predictive features that discriminate between bots and humans. Other recent surveys propose complementary or alternative taxonomies that are worth considering as well [36], [50], [51] Some openly accessible tools exist to detect bots on platforms like Twitter: (1) Botometer3, also used here,…”
MethodSelf-citationHajli, N., Saeed, U., Tajvidi, M., & Shirazi, F. (2021) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12554 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Charting the Landscape of Online Cryptocurrency Manipulation
Nizzoli, L., Tardelli, S., Avvenuti, M., Cresci, S., Tesconi, M., & Ferrara, E. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3003370 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
“Second, despite Botometer offers a simple, effective way to detect Twitter bots by relying on individual account features, recent studies highlighted that social bots acting in coordination are harder to identify when inspected individually [33], [62].”
BackgroundSelf-citationUncovering Coordinated Networks on Social Media: Methods and Case Studies
Pacheco, D., Hui, P.-M., Torres-Lugo, C., Truong, B. T., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18075 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
“Most machine learning tools to combat online abuse target the detection of social bots, and mainly use methods that focus on individual accounts (Davis et al. 2016; Varol et al. 2017; Yang et al. 2019; 2020; Sayyadiharikandeh et al. 2020).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationA one-class classification approach for bot detection on Twitter
Rodríguez‐Ruiz, J., Mata-Sánchez, J. I., Monroy, R., Loyola‐González, O., & López‐Cuevas, A. (2020) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2020.101715 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Filippetto, A. S., Lima, R., & Barbosa, J. L. V. (2020) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106497 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
He, L., He, C., Reynolds, T. L., Bai, Q., Huang, Y., Li, C., Zheng, K., & Chen, Y. (2021) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocab047 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
#Election2020: the first public Twitter dataset on the 2020 US Presidential election
Chen, E., Deb, A., & Ferrara, E. (2021) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-021-00117-9 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
“We used Indiana University’s Botometer, a tool that assigns a bot-score to a Twitter account based on an account’s activity [14, 15].”
MethodSelf-citationWho Falls for Online Political Manipulation?
Badawy, A., Lerman, K., & Ferrara, E. (2019) · Companion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference · doi:10.1145/3308560.3316494 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
“BotOrNot) [8, 40], consisting of both a public Web site (https://botometer.”
BackgroundSelf-citationCoordinated Behavior on Social Media in 2019 UK General Election
Nizzoli, L., Tardelli, S., Avvenuti, M., Cresci, S., & Tesconi, M. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18074 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
“We used the maximum of Botometer’s English and universal scores, both provided in the [0 , 1] range, as our automation score.”
MethodDetection of malicious social bots: A survey and a refined taxonomy
Latah, M. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113383 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
DeeProBot: a hybrid deep neural network model for social bot detection based on user profile data
Hayawi, K., Mathew, S. S., Venugopal, N., Masud, M. M., & Ho, P. (2022) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-022-00869-w · Cited by 93 · see citing works
“political-bots (Yang et al. 2019) Data based on politics-oriented bots shared by a Twitter user 61 0”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialShi, W., Liu, D., Yang, J., Zhang, J., Wen, S., & Su, J. Y. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17228701 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
“Based on machine learning algorithms, Botometer extracts more than 1000 predictive features that capture many suspicious behaviors, mainly through characterizing the account’s profile, friends, social network, temporal activity patterns, language, and sentiments [78,79].”
BackgroundBot, or not? Comparing three methods for detecting social bots in five political discourses
Martini, F., Samula, P., Keller, T. R., & Klinger, U. (2021) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/20539517211033566 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
“The developers, computer scientists at the University of Indiana, de fi ne social bots as ‘ automated or semi-automated accounts designed to impersonate humans ’ (Yang et al., 2019: 48).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Role Of Technology In Era 5.0 In The Development Of Arabic Language In The World Of Education
Keshav, M., Julien, L., & Miezel, J. (2022) · Journal International of Lingua and Technology · doi:10.55849/jiltech.v1i2.85 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
“Social & humanism character shifts to virtual global (Yang, 2019).”
BackgroundTackling misinformation: What researchers could do with social media data
Pasquetto, I. V., Swire‐Thompson, B., & Amazeen, M. A. (2020) · Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review · doi:10.37016/mr-2020-49 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
“Inauthentic, coordinated, malicious accounts, whether human-controlled or automated (Ferrara et al., 2016; Shao et al., 2018; Varol et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2019), domestic or state-sponsored (Zannettou et al., 2019), or anywhere in between, have been weaponized to influence public conversations…”
Combating Misinformation in Bangladesh
Haque, M. M., Yousuf, M., Alam, A. S., Saha, P., Ahmed, S. I., & Hassan, N. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415201 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
“Researchers from Indiana University has developed several tools to detect misinformation spread by social bots [66, 107].”
BackgroundExposure to social engagement metrics increases vulnerability to misinformation
Avram, M., Micallef, N., Patil, S., & Menczer, F. (2020) · Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review · doi:10.37016/mr-2020-033 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
“…2013), supervised models of automated behavior (Ferrara, Varol, Davis, Menczer, & Flammini, 2016; Varol, Ferrara, Davis, Menczer, & Flammini, 2017; Yang et al., 2019; Yang, Varol, Hui, & Menczer, 2020; Hui et al., 2019), time series analysis to detect promoted campaigns (Varol, Ferrara, Menczer,…”
Self-citationDetecting Propaganda Techniques in Memes
Dimitrov, D., Ali, B. B., Shaar, S., Alam, F., Silvestri, F., Firooz, H., Nakov, P., & Martino, G. D. S. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.516 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
“There has been work on exploring network structure, looking for malicious accounts and coordinated inauthentic behavior (Cresci et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2019; Chetan et al., 2019; Pacheco et al., 2020).”
A Deep Learning Approach for Robust Detection of Bots in Twitter Using Transformers
Martin-Gutierrez, D., Hernández-Peñaloza, G., Belmonte-Hernández, A., Lozano-Díez, A., & Álvarez, F. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3068659 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
“More recently, several scientific studies have incorporated more annotated samples to support this research such as [27], [44], [45] including some procedures for achieving better level of accuracy by strategically selecting a subset of training samples that better generalize the problem.”
BackgroundRiveiro, M., & Thill, S. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103507 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Pham, P., Nguyen, L. T. T., Vo, B., & Yun, U. (2021) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2021.101771 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
The power of emotions: Leveraging user generated content for customer experience management
Sykora, M. D., Elayan, S., Hodgkinson, I. R., Jackson, T., & West, A. A. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.02.048 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Unsupervised Social Bot Detection via Structural Information Theory
Peng, H. M., Zhang, J., Huang, X., Hao, Z., Li, A., Yu, Z., & Yu, P. S. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3660522 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Are You a Cyborg, Bot or Human?—A Survey on Detecting Fake News Spreaders
Shahid, W., Li, Y., Staples, D., Gilkar, G. A., Hakak, S., & Ghorbani, A. A. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3157724 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Social Bots and Their Coordination During Online Campaigns: A Survey
Khaund, T., Kirdemir, B., Agarwal, N., Liu, H., & Morstatter, F. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2021.3103515 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Anatomy of an AI-powered malicious social botnet
Yang, K., & Menczer, F. (2024) · Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media · doi:10.51685/jqd.2024.icwsm.7 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
“Specifically, we utilize four datasets: botometer-feedback (Yang et al., 2019), gilani-17 (Gilani et al., 2017), midterm-2018 (Yang et al., 2020), and varol-icwsm (Varol et al., 2017), randomly selecting 285 human accounts from each.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationWang, S., Yu, H., Hu, X., & Li, J. (2020) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12998 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Yuskovych-Zhukovska, V., Poplavska, T. M., Diachenko, O. F., Мішеніна, Т. М., Topolnyk, Y., & Gurevych, R. S. (2022) · BRAIN BROAD RESEARCH IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND NEUROSCIENCE · doi:10.18662/brain/13.1sup1/322 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Dynamic mechanism of social bots interfering with public opinion in network
Cheng, C. C. L., Luo, Y., & Yu, C. B. (2020) · Physica A Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2020.124163 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
#COVID-19 on Twitter: Bots, Conspiracies, and Social Media Activism
Ferrara, E. (2020) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationLuceri, L., Giordano, S., & Ferrara, E. (2020) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7311 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
“The research community offered multiple approaches for identifying automated accounts (Davis et al. 2016; Varol et al. 2017a; Yang et al. 2019; Chavoshi, Hamooni, and Mueen 2016; Subrahmanian et al. 2016; Chen and Subramanian 2018; Kudugunta and Ferrara 2018).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationNeutral bots probe political bias on social media
Chen, W., Pacheco, D. F., Yang, K.-C., & Menczer, F. (2021) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Self-citationRoSGAS : Adaptive Social Bot Detection with Reinforced Self-supervised GNN Architecture Search
Yang, Y., Yang, R., Li, Y., Cui, K., Yang, Z. Q., Wang, Y., Xu, J., & Xie, H. (2022) · ACM Transactions on the Web · doi:10.1145/3572403 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
“• Vendor-19 [55] include a collection of fake followers deriving from several companies.”
BackgroundNeutral bots probe political bias on social media
Chen, W., Pacheco, D. F., Yang, K.-C., & Menczer, F. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-25738-6 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Self-citationMarlow, T., Miller, S., & Roberts, J. T. (2021) · Climate Policy · doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1870098 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
“Botometer has been successfully used to evaluate the presence and activity of bots in other discourses (Varol et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2019), but our use here represents a first attempt to understand the presence of bots in the online climate change discourse.”
MethodSocial Bots Detection via Fusing BERT and Graph Convolutional Networks
Guo, Q., Xie, H., Li, Y., Ma, W., & Zhang, C. (2021) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym14010030 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Kovács-Győri, A., Ristea, A., Havas, C. R., Mehaffy, M. W., Hochmair, H. H., Resch, B., Juhász, L., Lehner, A., Ramasubramanian, L., & Blaschke, T. (2020) · ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · doi:10.3390/ijgi9120752 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
“Whereas the abundance and multi-dimensionality of crowd-sourced big data lend itself to machine learning techniques in the spatial and temporal domain, machine learning has also been used to assess and improve the data quality of VGI, such as OpenStreetMap [61], and to remove automated bots in social media data, such…”
BackgroundMohan, P. V., Dixit, S., Gyaneshwar, A., Chadha, U., Srinivasan, K., & Seo, J. T. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22062194 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
“When used effectively, ML powerful algorithms create a learning environment for systems, accomplishing tasks such as spotting known/unknown malicious attacks [2,3,6].”
MethodDeep Learning Based Social Bot Detection on Twitter
Arın, E., & Kutlu, M. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2023.3254429 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
“The Social bot detection problem has received attention from several researchers in various communities such as artificial intelligence [12], [13] and cybersecurity [14].”
BackgroundInfluentialCommunity-in-the-loop: towards pluralistic value creation in AI, or—why AI needs business ethics
Häußermann, J. J., & Lütge, C. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-021-00047-2 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Spotting Political Social Bots in Twitter: A Use Case of the 2019 Spanish General Election
Pastor-Galindo, J., Zago, M., Nespoli, P., Bernal, S. L., Celdrán, A., Pérez, M., Ruipérez-Valiente, J. A., Pérez, G., & Mármol, F. G. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2020.3031573 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
“While social media enables the fast propagation of fake news or any other misleading information over the Web, the so-called political social bots take care of amplifying their popularity to catch the eye of virtual communities and to create manually crafted viral trends [7].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEvolution of bot and human behavior during elections
Luceri, L., Deb, A., Giordano, S., & Ferrara, E. (2019) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v24i9.10213 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Self-citationBots, Elections, and Social Media: A Brief Overview
Ferrara, E. (2020) · Lecture notes in social networks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42699-6_6 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
“The only distinction worth mentioning is that we used the Botometer API version v3 that brings new features and a non-linear re-calibration of the model: in line with the associated study’s recommendations [86], we used a threshold of 0 .”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationUnveiling Coordinated Groups Behind White Helmets Disinformation
Pacheco, D. F., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2020) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3366424.3385775 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
“active accounts with similar tweets, likely to be automated according to Botometer [23].”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationZhang, Y., Chen, F., & Rohe, K. (2021) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmab021 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
SimilCatch: Enhanced social spammers detection on Twitter using Markov Random Fields
El-Mawass, N., Honeiné, P., & Vercouter, L. (2020) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102317 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
“This assumption is used to construct what can be called, depending on the application, a social Yu et al. (2008); Yu et al.”
MethodThe False Positive Problem of Automatic Bot Detection in Social Science ResearchPreprint
Rauchfleisch, A., & Kaiser, J. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3565233 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Content Moderation As a Political Issue: The Twitter Discourse Around Trump's Ban
Alizadeh, M., Gilardi, F., Hoes, E., Klüser, K. J., Kubli, M., & Marchal, N. (2022) · Journal of Quantitative Description Digital Media · doi:10.51685/jqd.2022.023 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“To address the concern that the Twitter discourse may be driven by bots, we classified a random sample of 100,000 user profiles in our dataset using the Bot-O-Meter API v414 (Yang et al., 2019).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAsymmetrical perceptions of partisan political bots
Yan, H. Y., Yang, K.-C., Menczer, F., & Shanahan, J. E. (2020) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820942744 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
“Social media platforms are being manipulated through malicious automated algorithms to sway public opinion for political gains (Ferrara et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationEphemeral Astroturfing Attacks: The Case of Fake Twitter Trends
Elmas, T., Overdorf, R., Özkalay, A. F., & Aberer, K. (2021) · IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/eurosp51992.2021.00035 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Modeling Information Cascades with Self-exciting Processes via Generalized Epidemic Models
Kong, Q., Rizoiu, M.-A., & Xie, L. (2020) · doi:10.1145/3336191.3371821 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“Due to the rate limit of the API, we only crawled cascades that have less than 2 , 500 events.”
MethodInfluentialSilenced on social media: the gatekeeping functions of shadowbans in the American Twitterverse
Jaidka, K., Mukerjee, S., & Lelkes, Y. (2023) · Journal of Communications · doi:10.1093/joc/jqac050 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking
Bhadani, S., Yamaya, S., Flammini, A., Menczer, F., Ciampaglia, G. L., & Nyhan, B. J. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01276-5 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
“Second, because diversity is a property of the audience and not of its level of engagement, it is less susceptible to manipulation if one can detect inauthentic partisan accounts [44, 49, 52, 53].”
BackgroundSelf-citationJournalists on Twitter: self-branding, audiences, and involvement of bots
Varol, O., & Uluturk, I. (2020) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-019-00056-6 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
“Social bots are a major tool for disseminating misinformation or disrupting online conversations [19, 54].”
BackgroundSelf-citationWiesenberg, M., & Tench, R. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.102042 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Tweet-Based Bot Detection Using Big Data Analytics
Derhab, A., Alawwad, R. A., Dehwah, K., Tariq, N., Khan, F. A., & Al-Muhtadi, J. F. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3074953 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
“One of the challenges faced in evaluating bot detection approaches is that the ground-truth data is insufficient [17].”
BackgroundDetecting bots in social-networks using node and structural embeddings
Dehghan, A., Siuta, K., Skorupka, A., Dubey, A., Betlen, A., Miller, D., Xu, W., Kamiński, B., & Prałat, P. (2023) · Journal Of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-023-00796-3 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Sultana, S., & Fussell, S. R. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3479580 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
“Many tools and techniques have been developed to detect bot and bot-generated information [37, 90, 166].”
BackgroundBotBuster: Multi-Platform Bot Detection Using a Mixture of Experts
Ng, L. H. X., & Carley, K. M. (2023) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v17i1.22179 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Characterizing the role of bots’ in polarized stance on social media
Aldayel, A., & Magdy, W. (2022) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-022-00858-z · Cited by 40 · see citing works
“One of the most popular bot-detection APIs is Botom-eter 11 (Davis et al. 2016; Yang et al. 2019), which provides a robust method to detect the existence of bots in social media.”
MethodCampedelli, G. M. (2020) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-020-00082-9 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Systematic Literature Review of Social Media Bots Detection Systems
Ellaky, Z., Benabbou, F., & Ouahabi, S. (2023) · Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jksuci.2023.04.004 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
TurkishBERTweet: Fast and reliable large language model for social media analysis
Najafi, A., & Varol, O. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124737 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationInvestigating the difference between trolls, social bots, and humans on Twitter
Mazza, M., Avvenuti, M., Cresci, S., & Tesconi, M. (2022) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2022.09.022 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Bots in Social and Interaction Networks
Mendoza, M., Tesconi, M., & Cresci, S. (2020) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3419369 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“In 2019, authors released the third and currently most up-to-date version of Botometer, featuring more training examples and better detection performance than its predecessors [64].”
BackgroundOWUOR, I., Hochmair, H. H., & Paulus, G. (2023) · Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism · doi:10.1016/j.jort.2023.100681 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Ng, L. H. X., Robertson, D. C., & Carley, K. M. (2022) · Online Social Networks and Media · doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2022.100198 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
A Survey on the Use of Graph Convolutional Networks for Combating Fake News
Varlamis, I., Michail, D., Glykou, F., & Tsantilas, P. (2022) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi14030070 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Bot prediction on social networks of Twitter in altmetrics using deep graph convolutional networks
Aljohani, N. R., Fayoumi, A. G., & Hassan, S. (2020) · Soft Computing · doi:10.1007/s00500-020-04689-y · Cited by 32 · see citing works
“Recently, Yang et al. (2019) performed an extensive review of various kinds of bots and their detection techniques.”
BackgroundEnhanced Twitter bot detection using ensemble machine learning
Shukla, H., Jagtap, N., & Patil, B. M. (2021) · International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies (ICICT) · doi:10.1109/icict50816.2021.9358734 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
“These artificial agents can be used for spamming, cyberbullying, terrorist activities, gaining fame, spreading wrong information, restricting freedom of speech [1] .”
BackgroundSecurity techniques for intelligent spam sensing and anomaly detection in online social platforms
Aldwairi, M., & Tawalbeh, L. (2019) · International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) · doi:10.11591/ijece.v10i1.pp275-287 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Trustworthy Health-Related Tweets on Social Media in Saudi Arabia: Tweet Metadata Analysis
Albalawi, Y., Nikolov, N. S., & Buckley, J. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/14731 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Social bots might introduce themselves as individual accounts with locations and photos for their profiles [64,66].”
A Feature Based Approach to Detect Fake Profiles in Twitter
Kaubiyal, J., & Jain, A. K. (2019) · International Conference on Big Data and Internet of Things (BDIOT) · doi:10.1145/3361758.3361784 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
“[14]reviewed different techniques that use artificial intelligence to combat bots in social media.”
BackgroundDetecting inorganic financial campaigns on Twitter
Tardelli, S., Avvenuti, M., Tesconi, M., & Cresci, S. (2021) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2021.101769 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Quantifying collective identity online from self-defining hashtags
Barron, A. T. J., & Bollen, J. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-19181-w · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“The Twitter streaming API has been a valuable resource for research on tweets themselves[11, 12, 13], but hides another resource: user profiles, containing self-descriptions, held in the metadata of each tweet.”
BackgroundLuo, H., Meng, X., Zhao, Y., & Cai, M. (2023) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2023.102051 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Hays, C., Schutzman, Z., Raghavan, M., Walk, E., & Zimmer, P. (2023) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3543507.3583214 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Yang, Y., Yang, R., Peng, H. M., et al. (2023) · ACM Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3543507.3583500 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
“(b) Vendor-19 (� = 0.5).”
MethodInfluentialDisruption, Self-Presentation, and Defensive Tactics at the Threshold of Learning
Gillespie, A. (2020) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1177/1089268020914258 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
“, paid-for or coerced crowds), online legitimacy has proven strikingly easy to manipulate (Yang et al., 2019).”
BackgroundKouvela, M., Dimitriadis, I., & Vakali, A. I. (2020) · International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems (MEDES) · doi:10.1145/3415958.3433075 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
“The need for delivering human understandable justification in terms of online social bots scoring is along with the earlier research work [50],[51] but also with the AI research responsibility directives [33],[39].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialA value-driven approach to addressing misinformation in social media
Komendantova, N., Ekenberg, L., Svahn, M., Larsson, A., Shah, S. I. H., Glinos, M., Koulolias, V., & Danielson, M. (2021) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-020-00702-9 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“This classification is based on various features of the user account profile, online social network structures, historical patterns of activity, and language and sentiments (Yang et al., 2019; Botometer tool, 2019).”
BackgroundFeature selection using Benford’s law to support detection of malicious social media bots
Mbona, I., & Eloff, J. H. P. (2021) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2021.09.038 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Dyvak, M., Melnyk, A., Мазепа, С., et al. (2021) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-92435-5_27 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Investigating clickbait in Chinese social media: A study of WeChat
Zhang, C., & Clough, P. D. (2020) · Online Social Networks and Media · doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2020.100095 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Social Media and Athlete Welfare
Kavanagh, E. J., Litchfield, C., & Osborne, J. (2023) · International Journal of Sport Communication · doi:10.1123/ijsc.2023-0116 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Digital Civic Participation and Misinformation during the 2020 Taiwanese Presidential Election
Chang, H.-C. H., Haider, S., & Ferrara, E. (2021) · Media and Communication · doi:10.17645/mac.v9i1.3405 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“In line with recent literature (Ferrara, 2020; Yang et al., 2019), we used the top 10 and bottom 10 percentiles of users to set apart likely human users from automated accounts, with Botscores of 0.06 and below for humans and 0.67 and above for bots.”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationToward a new approach to author profiling based on the extraction of statistical features
Ouni, S., Fkih, F., & Omri, M. N. (2021) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-021-00768-6 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yang, K., Varol, O., Davis, C. A., Ferrara, E., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Northeastern University (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- Corresponding author
- Menczer, Filippo
- Venue
- Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 48-61
- ISSN
- 2578-1863 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2907352650
- Cited by
- 419
- References
- 89
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 88 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 21
- FWCI
- 82.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks Open (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF‐17‐C‐0094, W911NF‐12‐1‐0037)
- National Institutes of Health (5R01DA039928‐03)
- Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550‐17‐1‐0327)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Keywords
- social bots, bot detection, Botometer, social media manipulation, user experience, interpretability, algorithmic fairness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review