Algorithmic amplification is the process by which automated ranking and recommendation systems on digital platforms increase the visibility of certain content beyond its initial audience. Major platforms including Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) use such systems to determine what appears in users' feeds and search results. The term is used in research on social media and digital media regulation to describe how platform design choices influence the distribution of online information. Unlike chronological feeds, algorithmic systems evaluate content using signals such as engagement rates, viewing duration, and predicted relevance to individual users. Content that performs strongly on these metrics may be promoted to progressively larger audiences through feeds, search rankings, or autoplay systems. The process is distinct from content moderation, which involves removing, labelling, or restricting content under platform rules, although the two can interact in practice. The concept is closely connected to the attention economy. Research has linked algorithmic amplification to the spread of misinformation and the circulation of political content, as well as to effects on young users' mental health. The scale and direction of those effects remain debated, in part because independent researchers have limited access to the internal workings of platform recommendation systems. Governments in the European Union, United Kingdom, United States, and China have pursued differing regulatory approaches to recommendation algorithms. The EU's Digital Services Act and the UK's Online Safety Act 2023 impose obligations on large platforms related to recommendation system transparency and risk, while China became the first country to enact binding legislation specifically targeting such systems. Internal documents and whistleblower testimony reported by the BBC in 2026 described how competitive pressure between Meta and TikTok led to trade-offs between engagement and user safety in the design of their recommendation systems. == Terminology == The term algorithmic amplification is used in media studies, platform governance scholarship and regulatory literature to describe how automated systems influence the distribution of content beyond what organic user sharing alone would produce. It is distinct from viral spread, which refers primarily to user-driven sharing behaviour, and from algorithmic bias, which describes systematic errors or unfairness in algorithmic outputs. The related term algorithmic curation is used for the broader process of selecting and ordering content, of which amplification is one possible outcome. The phrase also appears in regulatory and legislative discussion of recommendation systems. The European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) identifies recommendation systems as a potential source of systemic risk, and the term appears frequently in academic and policy commentary on the regulation. In the United States, proposals including the Filter Bubble Transparency Act and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) have used it to frame requirements around recommendation system transparency. In the United Kingdom, the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee used the term in a 2025 report on how recommendation algorithms contributed to the spread of misinformation during the 2024 Southport riots. A Joint Declaration on AI and Freedom of Expression adopted in October 2025 by four international freedom of expression mandate holders, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression and the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, stated that recommender systems and other AI-powered curation tools exert "a large hidden influence and gatekeeper role" over what information people access and consume. == Background == Early internet platforms typically displayed content in reverse-chronological order or through keyword-based search systems. Although the term is most often applied to social media, the underlying logic predates social media itself. A 2021 overview traced the origins of modern recommendation systems to the early 1990s, when they were first used experimentally for personal email and information filtering. The 1992 Tapestry mail system and the 1994 GroupLens news filtering system were early milestones before recommendation systems spread into e-commerce and other online services. As user bases and content volumes grew during the 2000s, major platforms including Google, YouTube, and Facebook developed machine-learning systems to personalise content delivery and prioritise material predicted to generate engagement. Facebook introduced its News Feed in 2006, which gradually shifted from chronological presentation towards algorithmically ranked content. YouTube altered its recommendation system in 2012 to prioritise watch time rather than clicks, a change the platform said was prompted by concerns that click-based metrics encouraged misleading thumbnails and low-quality videos. TikTok, launched internationally in 2018, adopted a model in which its primary content surface, the For You feed, is driven almost entirely by algorithmic recommendation rather than by a user's social graph. An internal document obtained by The New York Times in 2021 showed that the platform's algorithm optimised for retention and time spent, using signals such as watch duration, replays, likes, and comments to score and rank videos. Algorithmic recommendation also became central to platforms outside social media. Spotify's personalised features, including Discover Weekly, Release Radar, and Home recommendations, use behavioural signals and inferred "taste profiles" to surface tracks and artists beyond a listener's existing library. An ethnographic study of music curators at streaming platforms described this blend of algorithmic and human editorial selection as an "algo-torial" model of gatekeeping. Amazon adopted item-based collaborative filtering for product recommendations in 1998, and its recommendation engine has been described as one of the earliest large-scale deployments of recommendation technology in e-commerce. The same dynamics operate on adult content platforms. Law professor Amy Adler has argued that from 2007 onwards the pornography industry migrated to algorithm-driven streaming platforms, most of which are controlled by a single near-monopoly company, Aylo (formerly MindGeek). These platforms use algorithmic search engines, suggestions, rigid categorisation of content, and AI-driven search term optimisation in ways that produce the same distorting effects found on mainstream speech platforms, including filter bubbles, feedback loops, and the tendency of algorithmic recommendations to alter individual preferences. == Mechanisms == Recommendation systems commonly combine collaborative filtering, which predicts a user's preferences from the behaviour of similar users, with machine-learning models that predict which content a user is likely to engage with from their prior activity. In a common two-stage design, a platform first generates a set of candidate items from a large content pool and then ranks them using a scoring model with objectives such as predicted engagement or user satisfaction. Small changes in ranking criteria can shift exposure at scale, particularly when applied repeatedly across multiple browsing sessions. These systems typically rely on signals including engagement rates, viewing duration, click-through rates, and network relationships between users. Modern recommendation pipelines continuously update predictions as new behavioural data arrives, allowing platforms to adjust rankings in near real time. Users' revealed preferences, expressed through behaviour such as clicks and viewing time, do not always align with their stated preferences, expressed through explicit feedback such as surveys or content controls. Popularity signals can create feedback dynamics in which early engagement increases the likelihood that content will be shown to additional users. Experimental research on online cultural markets has demonstrated how such feedback processes can produce unequal visibility outcomes even when initial differences in content quality are small. == Beneficial and public-interest uses == Recommendation systems can help users navigate large volumes of content by surfacing material predicted to match their interests or needs, which can improve discoverability on platforms with large content libraries. In public health communication, platforms can help health authorities distribute timely information at scale, though the same recommendation systems also risk amplifying misinformation alongside official guidance. Sociologist Zeynep Tufekci has argued that the shift from independent blogs to large centralised platforms transferred gatekeeping power from traditional media to corporate algorithms. In the case of the Egyptian uprising of 2011, she noted that ordinary users
Mastodon (social network)
Mastodon is a free and open-source software platform for decentralized social networking with microblogging features similar to Twitter. It operates as a federated network of independently managed servers that communicate using the ActivityPub protocol, allowing users to connect across different instances within the Fediverse. Each Mastodon instance establishes its own moderation policies and content guidelines, distinguishing it from centrally controlled social media platforms. First released in 2016 by Eugen Rochko, Mastodon has positioned itself as an alternative to mainstream social media, particularly for users seeking decentralized, community-driven spaces. The platform has experienced multiple surges in adoption, most notably following the Twitter acquisition by Elon Musk in 2022, as users sought alternatives to Twitter. It is part of a broader shift toward decentralized social networks, including Bluesky and Lemmy. Mastodon emphasizes user privacy and moderation flexibility, offering features such as granular post visibility controls, content warning options, and local community-driven moderation. The software is written in Ruby on Rails and Node.js, with a web interface built using React and Redux. It is interoperable with other ActivityPub-based platforms, such as Threads, and supports various third-party applications on desktop and mobile devices. == Functionality == Users post short-form status messages, historically known as "toots", for others to see and interact with. On a standard Mastodon instance, these messages can include up to 500 text-based characters, greater than Twitter's 280-character limit. Some instances support even longer messages. Images, audio files, videos or polls can also be added to a message. Users join a specific Mastodon server, rather than a single centralized website or application. The servers are connected as nodes in a network, and each server can administer its own rules, account privileges, and whether to share messages to and from other servers. Users can communicate and follow each other across connected Mastodon servers with usernames similar in format to full email addresses. Since version 2.9.0, Mastodon's web user interface has offered a single-column mode for new users by default. In advanced mode, the interface approximates the microblogging interface of TweetDeck. === Privacy === Mastodon includes a number of specific privacy features. Each message has a variety of privacy options available, and users can choose whether the message is public or private. Messages can display public on a global feed, known as a timeline, or can be shared only to the user's followers. Messages can also be marked as unlisted from timelines or direct between users. Users can also mark their accounts as completely private. In the timeline, messages can display with an optional content warning feature, which requires readers to click on the hidden main body of the message to reveal it. Mastodon servers have used this feature to hide spoilers, trigger warnings, and not safe for work (NSFW) content, though some accounts use the feature to hide links and thoughts others might not want to read. Mastodon aggregates messages in local and federated timelines in real time. The local timeline shows messages from users on a singular server, while the federated timeline shows messages across all participating Mastodon servers. === Content moderation === In early 2017, journalists like Sarah Jeong distinguished Mastodon from Twitter for its approach to combating harassment. Mastodon uses community-based moderation, in which each server can limit or filter out undesirable types of content, while Twitter uses a single, global policy on content moderation. Servers can choose to limit or filter out messages with disparaging content. The founder of Mastodon, Eugen Rochko, believes that small, closely related communities deal with unwanted behavior more effectively than a large company's small safety team. In Move Slowly and Build Bridges, Robert W. Gehl argues that predominantly white participation has shaped Mastodon in ways that affect how reports of racism are received and limit its ability to replicate Black Twitter on Twitter. Users can also block and report others to administrators, much like on Twitter. Instance administrators can block other instances from interacting with their own, an action called defederation. By posting toots hashtagged with #fediblock, some instance administrators and users alert others of issues requiring moderation. === Searching === Mastodon by default allows searching for hashtags and mentioned accounts in the Fediverse. Server administrators can optionally enable Elasticsearch to search the full-text of public posts that have opted in to being indexed. == Versions == In September 2018, with the release of version 2.5 with redesigned public profile pages, Mastodon marked its 100th release. Mastodon 2.6 was released in October 2018, introducing the possibilities of verified profiles and live, in-stream link previews for images and videos. Version 2.7, in January 2019, made it possible to search for multiple hashtags at once, instead of searching for just a single hashtag, with more robust moderation capabilities for server administrators and moderators, while accessibility, such as contrast for users with sight issues, was improved. The ability for users to create and vote in polls, as well as a new invitation system to manage registrations was integrated in April 2019. Mastodon 2.8.1, released in May 2019, made images with content warnings blurred instead of completely hidden. In version 2.9 in June 2019, an optional single-column view was added. This view became the default displayed to new users, with a user "preferences" option to switch to a multiple-column-based view. In August 2020, Mastodon 3.2 was released. It included a redesigned audio player with custom thumbnails and the ability to add personal notes to one's profile. In July 2021, an official client for iOS devices was released. According to the project's then CEO, Eugen Rochko, the release was part of an effort to attract new users. Mastodon 4.0 was released in November 2022, including language support for translating posts, editing posts and following hashtags. Mastodon 4.5 was released in November 2025. Among other features it introduced quote posts, which were previously rejected from being implemented due to concerns about toxicity and harassment. To mitigate these issues Mastodon's quote post feature has been designed in a way that lets users decide if and by whom their posts can be quoted. == Software == Mastodon is published as free and open-source software under the Affero GPL license, allowing anyone to use the software or modify it as they wish. Servers can be run by any individual or organization, and users can join these servers as they wish. The server software itself is powered by Ruby on Rails and Node.js, with its web client being written in React.js and Redux. The only database software supported is PostgreSQL, with Redis being used for job processing and various actions that Mastodon needs to process. The service is interoperable with the fediverse, a collection of social networking services which use the ActivityPub protocol for communication between each other, with previous versions containing support for OStatus. Client apps for interacting with the Mastodon API are available for desktop computer operating systems, including Windows, macOS and the Linux family of operating systems, as well as mobile phones running iOS and Android. The API is open for anyone to utilize, allowing clients to be built for any operating system that can connect to the internet. === Integration with Fediverse === Mastodon uses the ActivityPub protocol for federation; this allows users to communicate between independent Mastodon instances and other ActivityPub compatible services. Thus, Mastodon is generally considered to be a part of the Fediverse. Services utilizing the ActivityPub protocol exist which allow for searching all posts on all instances as long as users opt-in. For similar reasons, only hashtags can appear in a Mastodon instance's trending topics, not arbitrary popular words. Trending topics vary between instances, since individual instances are aware of different subsets of posts from the whole fediverse. === Security concerns === While Mastodon's decentralized structure is one of its most distinctive features, it also poses additional security challenges. Since many Mastodon instances are run by volunteers, some security experts are concerned about data security and responsiveness to new threats and vulnerabilities across the network, considering the difficulty of configuring and maintaining an instance as well as uneven skill levels among administrators. Administrators of an instance also have access to the private information of any users that are either registered with that instance or have federated
Lillian Lee (computer scientist)
Lillian Lee is a computer scientist whose research involves natural language processing, sentiment analysis, and computational social science. She is a professor of computer science and information science at Cornell University, and co-editor-in-chief of the journal Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics. == Education == Lee graduated from Cornell University in 1993 with an undergraduate degree in math and science. She completed her Ph.D. at Harvard University in 1997. Her dissertation, Similarity-Based Approaches to Natural Language Processing, was supervised by Stuart M. Shieber. == Career == Lee has been a member of the Cornell faculty since 1997. == Recognition == Lee has been a fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence since 2013, and of the Association for Computational Linguistics since 2017. Lee was elected as an ACM Fellow in 2018 for "contributions to natural language processing, sentiment analysis, and computational social science".
F-score
In statistical analysis of binary classification and information retrieval systems, the F-score or F-measure is a measure of predictive performance. It is calculated from the precision and recall of the test, where the precision is the number of true positive results divided by the number of all samples predicted to be positive, including those not identified correctly, and the recall is the number of true positive results divided by the number of all samples that should have been identified as positive. Precision is also known as positive predictive value, and recall is also known as sensitivity in diagnostic binary classification. The F1 score is the harmonic mean of the precision and recall. It thus symmetrically represents both precision and recall in one metric. The more generic F β {\displaystyle F_{\beta }} score applies additional weights, valuing one of precision or recall more than the other. The highest possible value of an F-score is 1.0, indicating perfect precision and recall, and the lowest possible value is 0, if the precision or the recall is zero. == Etymology == The name F-measure is believed to be named after a different F function in Van Rijsbergen's book, when introduced to the Fourth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-4, 1992). == Definition == The traditional F-measure or balanced F-score (F1 score) is the harmonic mean of precision and recall: F 1 = 2 r e c a l l − 1 + p r e c i s i o n − 1 = 2 p r e c i s i o n ⋅ r e c a l l p r e c i s i o n + r e c a l l = 2 T P 2 T P + F P + F N {\displaystyle F_{1}={\frac {2}{\mathrm {recall} ^{-1}+\mathrm {precision} ^{-1}}}=2{\frac {\mathrm {precision} \cdot \mathrm {recall} }{\mathrm {precision} +\mathrm {recall} }}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{2\mathrm {TP} +\mathrm {FP} +\mathrm {FN} }}} With precision = TP / (TP + FP) and recall = TP / (TP + FN), it follows that the numerator of F1 is the sum of their numerators and the denominator of F1 is the sum of their denominators. If FP=FN F 1 = 2 T P 2 T P + 2 F P = T P T P + F P {\displaystyle F_{1}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{2\mathrm {TP} +2\mathrm {FP} }}={\frac {\mathrm {TP} }{\mathrm {TP} +\mathrm {FP} }}} or F 1 = 2 T P 2 T P + 2 F N = T P T P + F N {\displaystyle F_{1}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{2\mathrm {TP} +2\mathrm {FN} }}={\frac {\mathrm {TP} }{\mathrm {TP} +\mathrm {FN} }}} So, F1 = precision = recall If TP=FP=FN F 1 = 2 T P 2 T P + 2 F P = 2 T P 4 T P = 1 2 = 0.5 {\displaystyle F_{1}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{2\mathrm {TP} +2\mathrm {FP} }}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{4\mathrm {TP} }}={\frac {1}{2}}=0.5} or F 1 = 2 T P 2 T P + 2 F N = 2 T P 4 T P = 1 2 = 0.5 {\displaystyle F_{1}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{2\mathrm {TP} +2\mathrm {FN} }}={\frac {2\mathrm {TP} }{4\mathrm {TP} }}={\frac {1}{2}}=0.5} To see it as a harmonic mean, note that F 1 − 1 = 1 2 ( r e c a l l − 1 + p r e c i s i o n − 1 ) {\displaystyle F_{1}^{-1}={\frac {1}{2}}(\mathrm {recall} ^{-1}+\mathrm {precision} ^{-1})} . === Fβ score === A more general F score, F β {\displaystyle F_{\beta }} , that uses a positive real factor β {\displaystyle \beta } , where β {\displaystyle \beta } is chosen such that recall is considered β {\displaystyle \beta } times as important as precision, is: F β = β 2 + 1 ( β 2 ⋅ r e c a l l − 1 ) + p r e c i s i o n − 1 = ( 1 + β 2 ) ⋅ p r e c i s i o n ⋅ r e c a l l ( β 2 ⋅ p r e c i s i o n ) + r e c a l l {\displaystyle F_{\beta }={\frac {\beta ^{2}+1}{(\beta ^{2}\cdot \mathrm {recall} ^{-1})+\mathrm {precision} ^{-1}}}={\frac {(1+\beta ^{2})\cdot \mathrm {precision} \cdot \mathrm {recall} }{(\beta ^{2}\cdot \mathrm {precision} )+\mathrm {recall} }}} To see that as a weighted harmonic mean, note that F β − 1 = 1 β + β − 1 ( β ⋅ r e c a l l − 1 + β − 1 ⋅ p r e c i s i o n − 1 ) {\displaystyle F_{\beta }^{-1}={\frac {1}{\beta +\beta ^{-1}}}(\beta \cdot \mathrm {recall} ^{-1}+\beta ^{-1}\cdot \mathrm {precision} ^{-1})} . In terms of Type I and type II errors this becomes: F β = ( 1 + β 2 ) ⋅ T P ( 1 + β 2 ) ⋅ T P + β 2 ⋅ F N + F P = ( 1 + β 2 ) ⋅ T P ( T P + F N ) ⋅ β 2 + ( T P + F P ) {\displaystyle F_{\beta }={\frac {(1+\beta ^{2})\cdot \mathrm {TP} }{(1+\beta ^{2})\cdot \mathrm {TP} +\beta ^{2}\cdot \mathrm {FN} +\mathrm {FP} }}\,={\frac {(1+\beta ^{2})\cdot \mathrm {TP} }{(\mathrm {TP} +\mathrm {FN} )\cdot \beta ^{2}+(\mathrm {TP} +\mathrm {FP} )}}\,} Two commonly used values for β {\displaystyle \beta } are 2, which weighs recall higher than precision, and 1/2, which weighs recall lower than precision. The F-measure was derived so that F β {\displaystyle F_{\beta }} "measures the effectiveness of retrieval with respect to a user who attaches β {\displaystyle \beta } times as much importance to recall as precision". It is based on Van Rijsbergen's effectiveness measure E = 1 − ( α p + 1 − α r ) − 1 {\displaystyle E=1-\left({\frac {\alpha }{p}}+{\frac {1-\alpha }{r}}\right)^{-1}} Their relationship is: F β = 1 − E {\displaystyle F_{\beta }=1-E} where α = 1 1 + β 2 {\displaystyle \alpha ={\frac {1}{1+\beta ^{2}}}} == Diagnostic testing == This is related to the field of binary classification where recall is often termed "sensitivity". == Dependence of the F-score on class imbalance == Precision-recall curve, and thus the F β {\displaystyle F_{\beta }} score, explicitly depends on the ratio r {\displaystyle r} of positive to negative test cases. This means that comparison of the F-score across different problems with differing class ratios is problematic. One way to address this issue (see e.g., Siblini et al., 2020) is to use a standard class ratio r 0 {\displaystyle r_{0}} when making such comparisons. == Applications == The F-score is often used in the field of information retrieval for measuring search, document classification, and query classification performance. It is particularly relevant in applications which are primarily concerned with the positive class and where the positive class is rare relative to the negative class. Earlier works focused primarily on the F1 score, but with the proliferation of large scale search engines, performance goals changed to place more emphasis on either precision or recall and so F β {\displaystyle F_{\beta }} is seen in wide application. The F-score is also used in machine learning. However, the F-measures do not take true negatives into account, hence measures such as the Matthews correlation coefficient, Informedness or Cohen's kappa may be preferred to assess the performance of a binary classifier. The F-score has been widely used in the natural language processing literature, such as in the evaluation of named entity recognition and word segmentation. == Properties == The F1 score is the Dice coefficient of the set of retrieved items and the set of relevant items. The F1-score of a classifier which always predicts the positive class converges to 1 as the probability of the positive class increases. The F1-score of a classifier which always predicts the positive class is equal to 2 proportion_of_positive_class / ( 1 + proportion_of_positive_class ), since the recall is 1, and the precision is equal to the proportion of the positive class. If the scoring model is uninformative (cannot distinguish between the positive and negative class) then the optimal threshold is 0 so that the positive class is always predicted. F1 score is concave in the true positive rate. == Criticism == David Hand and others criticize the widespread use of the F1 score since it gives equal importance to precision and recall. In practice, different types of mis-classifications incur different costs. In other words, the relative importance of precision and recall is an aspect of the problem. According to Davide Chicco and Giuseppe Jurman, the F1 score is less truthful and informative than the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) in binary evaluation classification. David M W Powers has pointed out that F1 ignores the True Negatives and thus is misleading for unbalanced classes, while kappa and correlation measures are symmetric and assess both directions of predictability - the classifier predicting the true class and the true class predicting the classifier prediction, proposing separate multiclass measures Informedness and Markedness for the two directions, noting that their geometric mean is correlation. Another source of critique of F1 is its lack of symmetry. It means it may change its value when dataset labeling is changed - the "positive" samples are named "negative" and vice versa. This criticism is met by the P4 metric definition, which is sometimes indicated as a symmetrical extension of F1. Finally, Ferrer and Dyrland et al. argue that the expected cost (or its counterpart, the expected utility) is the only principled metric for evaluation of classification decisions, having various advantages over the F-score and the MCC. Both works show that the F-score can result in wrong conclusions about the absolute and relative quality of systems. == Difference from Fowlkes–Mallows index == While the F-measur
Dan Hendrycks
Dan Hendrycks (born 1994 or 1995) is an American machine learning researcher. He serves as the director of the Center for AI Safety, a nonprofit research organization based in San Francisco, California. == Early life and education == Hendrycks was raised in a Christian evangelical household in Marshfield, Missouri. He received a B.S. from the University of Chicago in 2018 and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley in Computer Science in 2022. == Career and research == Hendrycks' research focuses on topics that include machine learning safety, machine ethics, and robustness. He credits his participation in the effective altruism (EA) movement-linked 80,000 Hours program for his career focus towards AI safety, though denies being an advocate for EA. Hendrycks is the main author of the research paper that introduced the activation function GELU in 2016, and of the paper that introduced the language model benchmark MMLU (Massive Multitask Language Understanding) in 2020. In February 2022, Hendrycks co-authored recommendations for the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to inform the management of risks from artificial intelligence. In September 2022, Hendrycks wrote a paper providing a framework for analyzing the impact of AI research on societal risks. He later published a paper in March 2023 examining how natural selection and competitive pressures could shape the goals of artificial agents. This was followed by "An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks", which discusses four categories of risks: malicious use, AI race dynamics, organizational risks, and rogue AI agents. Hendrycks is the safety adviser of xAI, an AI startup company founded by Elon Musk in 2023. To avoid any potential conflicts of interest, he receives a symbolic one-dollar salary and holds no company equity. In November 2024, he also joined Scale AI as an advisor collecting a one-dollar salary. Hendrycks is the creator of Humanity's Last Exam, a benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of large language models, which he developed in collaboration with Scale AI. In 2024, Hendrycks published the textbook Introduction to AI Safety, Ethics, and Society, based on courseware he had previously developed. == Selected publications == Hendrycks, Dan; Gimpel, Kevin (2020-07-08). "Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)". arXiv:1606.08415 [cs.LG]. Hendrycks, Dan; Gimpel, Kevin (2018-10-03). "A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks". International Conference on Learning Representations 2017. arXiv:1610.02136. Hendrycks, Dan; Mazeika, Mantas; Dietterich, Thomas (2019-01-28). "Deep Anomaly Detection with Outlier Exposure". International Conference on Learning Representations 2019. arXiv:1812.04606. Hendrycks, Dan; Mazeika, Mantas; Zou, Andy (2021-10-25). "What Would Jiminy Cricket Do? Towards Agents That Behave Morally". Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021. arXiv:2110.13136.
Educational robotics
Educational robotics teaches the design, analysis, application and operation of robots. Robots include articulated robots, mobile robots or autonomous vehicles. Educational robotics can be taught from elementary school to graduate programs. Robotics may also be used to motivate and facilitate the instruction other, often foundational, topics such as computer programming, artificial intelligence or engineering design. == Education and training == Robotics engineers design robots, maintain them, develop new applications for them, and conduct research to expand the potential of robotics. Robots have become a popular educational tool in some middle and high schools, as well as in numerous youth summer camps, raising interest in programming, artificial intelligence and robotics among students. First-year computer science courses at several universities now include programming of a robot in addition to traditional software engineering-based coursework. == Category of Educational robotics == The categories of educational robots seen as having more than one category. It can be alienated into different categories based on their physical design and coding method. Generally they are categorised as arm robots, wheeled mobile robots and humanoid robots. Tangibly, coded robots uses a physical means of coding instead of the screens coding. === Initiatives in schools === Leachim, was a robot teacher programmed with the class curricular, as well as certain biographical information on the 40 students whom it was programmed to teach. Leachim could synthesize human speech using Diphone synthesis. It was invented by Michael J. Freeman in 1974 and was tested in a fourth grade classroom in the Bronx, New York. === Post-secondary degree programs === From approximately 1960 through 2005, robotics education at post-secondary institutions took place through elective courses, thesis experiences and design projects offered as part of degree programs in traditional academic disciplines, such as mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, industrial engineering or computer science. Since 2005, more universities have begun granting degrees in robotics as a discipline in its own right, often under the name "Robotic Engineering". Based on a 2015 web-based survey of robotics educators, the degree programs and their estimates annual graduates are listed alphabetically below. Note that only official degree programs where the word "robotics" appears on the transcript or diploma are listed here; whereas degree programs in traditional disciplines with course concentrations or thesis topics related to robotics are deliberately omitted. === Certification === The Robotics Certification Standards Alliance (RCSA) is an international robotics certification authority that confers various industry- and educational-related robotics certifications. === Summer robotics camp === Several summer camp programs include robotics as part of their core curriculum. In addition, youth summer robotics programs are frequently offered by celebrated museums such as the American Museum of Natural History and The Tech Museum of Innovation in Silicon Valley, CA, just to name a few. There are of benefits that come from attending robotics camps. It teaches students how to use teamwork, resilience and motivation, and decision-making. Students learn teamwork because most camps involve exciting activities requiring teamwork. Resilience and motivation is expected because by completing the challenging programs, students feel talented and accomplished after they complete the program. Also students are given unique situations making them make decisions to further their situation. === Educational robotics in special education === Educational robotics can be a useful tool in early and special education. According to a journal on new perspectives in science education, educational robotics can help to develop abilities that promote autonomy and assist their integration into society. Social and personal skills can also be developed through educational robotics. Using Lego Mindstorms NXT, schoolteachers were able to work with middle school aged children in order to develop programs and improve the children's social and personal skills. Additionally, problem solving skills and creativity were utilized through the creation of artwork and scenery to house the robots. Other studies show the benefits of educational robotics in special education as promoting superior cognitive functions, including executive functions. This can lead to an increased ability in "problem solving, reasoning and planning in typically developing preschool children." Through eight weeks of weekly forty-five-minute group sessions using the Bee-Bot, an increase in interest, attention, and interaction between both peers and adults was found in the school and preschool-aged children with Down Syndrome. This study suggests that educational robotics in the classroom can also lead to an improvement in visuo-spatial memory and mental planning. Furthermore, executive functions seemed to be possible in one child during this study.
Rada Mihalcea
Rada Mihalcea is the Janice M. Jenkins Collegiate Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Michigan. She has made significant contributions to natural language processing, multimodal processing, computational social science, and AI for Social Good. With Paul Tarau, she invented the TextRank Algorithm, which is a classic algorithm widely used for text summarization. == Career == Mihalcea has a Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering from Southern Methodist University (2001) and a Ph.D. in Linguistics, Oxford University (2010). In 2017 she was named Director of the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at University of Michigan, Computer Science and Engineering. In 2018, Mihalcea was elected as vice president for the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). In 2021, she was elected the president for ACL. She is a professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Michigan, where she also leads the Language and Information Technologies (LIT) Lab. Before joining UofM, she was a professor at North Texas University between 2002-2013. A prolific researcher, Mihalcea has authored or coauthored over 500 articles since 1998 on topics ranging from semantic analysis of text to lie detection. Her work has been cited over 50,000 times on Google Scholar, which made her one of the most cited scholars in Multimodal Interaction and Computational Social Science. In 2008, Mihalcea received the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) She is an ACM Fellow (since 2019), AAAI Fellow (since 2021), and ACL Fellow (since 2025). Mihalcea is an outspoken promoter of diversity in computer science. She also supports an expansion of the traditional analysis of educational success, which tends to focus on academic behaviour, to include student life, personality and background outside of the classroom. Mihalcea leads Girls Encoded, a program designed to develop the pipeline of women in computer science as well as to retain the women who have entered into the program. == Awards == Elected to American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 2026 ACL Fellow, 2025 "for significant contributions to graph-based language processing, computational social science, and the advancement of NLP for social good." AAAI Fellow, 2021 "for significant contributions to natural language processing and computational social science". ACM Fellow, 2019 "for contributions to natural language processing, with innovations in data-driven and graph-based language processing". Sarah Goddard Power Award, 2019. Carol Hollenshead Award, 2018. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE), 2009. Awarded by President Barack Obama. == Research == Mihalcea is known for her research in natural language processing, multimodal processing, computational social sciences. In a collaboration she leads at the University of Michigan, Mihalcea has created software that can detect human lying. In a study of video clips of high profile court cases, a computer was more accurate at detecting deception than human judges. Mihalcea's lie-detection software uses machine learning techniques to analyze video clips of actual trials. In her 2015 study, the team used clips from The Innocence Project, a national organization that works to reexamine cases where individuals were tried without the benefit of DNA testing with the aim of exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals. After identifying common human gestures, they transcribed the audio from the video clips of trials and analyzed how often subjects labeled deceptive used various words and phrases. The system was 75% accurate in identifying which subjects were deceptive among 120 videos. That puts Mihalcea's algorithm on par with the most commonly accepted form of lie detection, polygraph tests, which are roughly 85 percent accurate when testing guilty people and 56 percent accurate when testing the innocent. She notes there are still improvements to be made — in particular to account for cultural and demographic differences. A possibly unique advantage of Mihalcea's study was the real world, high stakes nature of the footage analyzed in the study. In laboratory experiments, it is difficult to create a setting that motivates people to truly lie. In 2018, Mihalcea and her collaborators worked on an algorithm-based system that identifies linguistic cues in fake news stories. It successfully found fakes up to 76% of the time, compared to a human success rate of 70%. == Publications == === Books === Rada Mihalcea and Dragomir Radev, Graph-based Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval, Cambridge U. Press, 2011. Gabe Ignatow and Rada Mihalcea, Text Mining: A Guidebook for the Social Sciences, SAGE, 2016. Gabe Ignatow and Rada Mihalcea, An Introduction to Text Mining: Research Design, Data Collection, and Analysis, SAGE, 2017. === Journals and conferences === Textrank: Bringing order into text. R. Mihalcea, P. Tarau. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing. 2004 Corpus-based and knowledge-based measures of text semantic similarity. R. Mihalcea, C. Corley, C. Strapparava. AAAI 6, 775-780. 2006 Wikify!: linking documents to encyclopedic knowledge. R. Mihalcea, A. Csomai. Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on Conference on information and information management. 2007 Learning to identify emotions in text. C. Strapparava, R. Mihalcea. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Applied computing, 1556-1560. 2008 Semeval-2007 task 14: Affective text. C. Strapparava, R. Mihalcea. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations. 2007 Learning multilingual subjective language via cross-lingual projections. R. Mihalcea, C. Banea, J. Wiebe. Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics. 2007 Graph-based ranking algorithms for sentence extraction, applied to text summarization. R. Mihalcea. Proceedings of the ACL Interactive Poster and Demonstration Sessions. 2004 Falcon: Boosting knowledge for answer engines. S. Harabagiu, D. Moldovan, M. Pasca, R. Mihalcea, M. Surdeanu, Razvan Bunescu, Roxana Girju, Vasile Rus, Paul Morarescu. TREC 9, 479-488. 2000 Measuring the semantic similarity of texts. C. Corley, R. Mihalcea. Proceedings of the ACL workshop on empirical modeling of semantic equivalence and entailment. 2005 R Mihalcea (2007). "Using wikipedia for automatic word-sense disambiguation". Human Language Technologies 2007: The Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics; Proceedings of the Main Conference. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.74.3561. - see also Word-sense disambiguation Unsupervised graph-based word sense disambiguation using measures of word semantic similarity. R. Sinha, R. Mihalcea. International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC 2007), 363-369. 2007 == Personal life == Mihalcea was born in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, where she attended the Technical University of Cluj-Napoca. She can speak Romanian, English, Italian, and French. Mihalcea has two children - Zara (b. 2009) and Caius (b. 2013). They were both born in Dallas, Texas. She is married to an associate professor of engineering at the University of Michigan–Flint - Mihai Burzo. They met while they were both completing Ph.D.s at Southern Methodist University in 2001 and have often collaborated on research, such as the 2015 study on lie detection.