BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Koustuv Saha

Koustuv Saha contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial Intelligencecs.CYHuman-Computer InteractionComputation and LanguageSocial and Information Networks

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Algorithmic Cultivation: How Social Media Feeds Shape User Language

Algorithmic feeds have become primary environments for encountering information online, yet while they shape what people see, less is known about how sustained feed exposure shapes how people write. Drawing on Cultivation Theory, we examine whether algorithmic feeds function as online environments that leave measurable traces in users' language. We leverage a large-scale longitudinal dataset of 235M posts by 4M users on Bluesky, and conduct a quasi-experimental study matching an initial pool of 368,513 users exposed to one of three feeds -- News, Science, and Blacksky -- with a pool of 2,001,915 active control users who did not engage with any of these feeds. We examine linguistic evolution across three dimensions: lexico-semantics, psycholinguistics, and topics. We find that users exposed to these feeds show significantly greater stylistic accommodation, semantic alignment, and register formalization than matched controls. These effects vary markedly by feed identity -- Blacksky produces the deepest psycholinguistic restructuring, with significant shifts in cognitive processing, affective expression, and pronoun use, while News and Science effects are largely confined to register and topical focus. Regression models reveal that reposting is the most consistent predictor of linguistic convergence across all feeds, whereas posting and bookmarking show feed-dependent effects, with effects differing more than fourfold across feeds. Our work extends Cultivation Theory beyond belief formation to linguistic behavior, demonstrating that feeds function as persistent linguistic environments that gradually shape what and how users write online. Our work has implications for studying algorithmic influence, online identity formation, and the design and governance of feed-based platforms that mediate online interactions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

Belief Is All You Need: Modeling Narrative Archetypes in Conspiratorial Discourse

Conspiratorial discourse is increasingly embedded within digital communication ecosystems, yet its structure and spread remain difficult to study. This work analyzes conspiratorial narratives in Singapore-based Telegram groups, showing that such content is woven into everyday discussions rather than confined to isolated echo chambers. We propose a two-stage computational framework. First, we fine-tune RoBERTa-large to classify messages as conspiratorial or not, achieving an F1-score of 0.866 on 2,000 expert-labeled messages. Second, we build a signed belief graph in which nodes represent messages and edge signs reflect alignment in belief labels, weighted by textual similarity. We introduce a Signed Belief Graph Neural Network (SiBeGNN) that uses a Sign Disentanglement Loss to learn embeddings that separate ideological alignment from stylistic features. Using hierarchical clustering on these embeddings, we identify seven narrative archetypes across 553,648 messages: legal topics, medical concerns, media discussions, finance, contradictions in authority, group moderation, and general chat. SiBeGNN yields stronger clustering quality (cDBI = 8.38) than baseline methods (13.60 to 67.27), supported by 88 percent inter-rater agreement in expert evaluations. Our analysis shows that conspiratorial messages appear not only in clusters focused on skepticism or distrust, but also within routine discussions of finance, law, and everyday matters. These findings challenge common assumptions about online radicalization by demonstrating that conspiratorial discourse operates within ordinary social interaction. The proposed framework advances computational methods for belief-driven discourse analysis and offers applications for stance detection, political communication studies, and content moderation policy.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

Causal Stories from Sensor Traces: Auditing Epistemic Overreach in LLM-Generated Personal Sensing Explanations

LLMs are increasingly used to explain personal sensing data, translating traces of activity and mood into natural-language accounts of why an anomalous day may have occurred. However, such explanations can sound coherent and personally meaningful even when the underlying evidence is sparse or missing. We introduce epistemic overreach (EO) as a measure for cases where a generated explanation implies more than the available sensing evidence can justify. To audit how often and in what forms EO occurs, we obtained anomalous-day scenarios from three longitudinal sensing datasets of college students: StudentLife, GLOBEM, and CollegeExperience. Across activity, sleep, and affect anomalies, we generated 14,922 explanations using three LLM families -- Llama, Qwen, and GPT -- under two prompting conditions: one minimally constrained prompt and another prompt explicitly instructing models to bound claims to the data. For each scenario, we varied the amount of behavioral evidence available to the model to examine whether more evidence reduces EO. We evaluated each explanation using a structured rubric, decomposing EO into the dimensions of unsupported causal attribution, unacknowledged data gaps, overconfident language, temporal inconsistency, and diagnostic inference. We find that LLMs routinely attribute anomalous days to causes without sufficient support from the data, and that this pattern replicates across datasets, anomaly types, and model families. Further, providing richer context does not reliably reduce EO; bounded prompting helps but does not eliminate it. These findings suggest that evidential grounding should be a first-order evaluation criterion for LLM-generated personal sensing explanations, alongside fluency and plausibility. We argue that personal sensing explanations require evidential discipline: systems must distinguish what is observed, what is inferred, and what remains unknown.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

VASTU: Value-Aligned Social Toolkit for Online Content Curation

Detecting what content communities value is a foundational challenge for social computing systems -- from feed curation and content ranking to moderation tools and personalized recommendation systems. Yet existing approaches remain fragmented across methodological paradigms, and it remains unclear which methods best capture community-specific notions of value. We introduce VASTU (Value-Aligned Social Toolkit for Online Content Curation), a benchmark and evaluation framework for systematically comparing approaches to detecting community-valued content. VASTU includes a dataset of 75,000 comments from 15 diverse Reddit communities, annotated with community approval labels and rich linguistic features. Using VASTU, we evaluate feature-based models, transformers, prompted and fine-tuned language models under global versus community-specific training regimes. We find that community-specific models consistently outperform global approaches, with fine-tuned transformers achieving the strongest performance (0.72 AUROC). Notably, fine-tuned SLMs (0.65 AUROC) substantially outperform prompted LLMs (0.60 AUROC) despite being 100 times smaller. Counterintuitively, chain-of-thought prompting provides no benefit, and reasoning models perform the worst (0.53 AUROC), suggesting this task requires learning community norms rather than test-time reasoning. By releasing VASTU, we provide a standardized benchmark to advance research on value-aligned sociotechnical systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Examining Factors Associated with Twitter Account Suspension Following the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election

Online social media enables mass-level, transparent, and democratized discussion on numerous socio-political issues. Due to such openness, these platforms often endure manipulation and misinformation - leading to negative impacts. To prevent such harmful activities, platform moderators employ countermeasures to safeguard against actors violating their rules. However, the correlation between publicly outlined policies and employed action is less clear to general people. In this work, we examine violations and subsequent moderation related to the 2020 U.S. President Election discussion on Twitter, a popular micro-blogging site. We focus on quantifying plausible reasons for the suspension, drawing on Twitter's rules and policies by identifying suspended users (Case) and comparing their activities and properties with (yet) non-suspended (Control) users. Using a dataset of 240M election-related tweets made by 21M unique users, we observe that Suspended users violate Twitter's rules at a higher rate (statistically significant) than Control users across all the considered aspects - hate speech, offensiveness, spamming, and civic integrity. Moreover, through the lens of Twitter's suspension mechanism, we qualitatively examine the targeted topics for manipulation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Jointly Predicting Job Performance, Personality, Cognitive Ability, Affect, and Well-Being

Assessment of job performance, personalized health and psychometric measures are domains where data-driven and ubiquitous computing exhibits the potential of a profound impact in the future. Existing techniques use data extracted from questionnaires, sensors (wearable, computer, etc.), or other traits, to assess well-being and cognitive attributes of individuals. However, these techniques can neither predict individual's well-being and psychological traits in a global manner nor consider the challenges associated to processing the data available, that is incomplete and noisy. In this paper, we create a benchmark for predictive analysis of individuals from a perspective that integrates: physical and physiological behavior, psychological states and traits, and job performance. We design data mining techniques as benchmark and uses real noisy and incomplete data derived from wearable sensors to predict 19 constructs based on 12 standardized well-validated tests. The study included 757 participants who were knowledge workers in organizations across the USA with varied work roles. We developed a data mining framework to extract the meaningful predictors for each of the 19 variables under consideration. Our model is the first benchmark that combines these various instrument-derived variables in a single framework to understand people's behavior by leveraging real uncurated data from wearable, mobile, and social media sources. We verify our approach experimentally using the data obtained from our longitudinal study. The results show that our framework is consistently reliable and capable of predicting the variables under study better than the baselines when prediction is restricted to the noisy, incomplete data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access