Modeling Misinformation as a Commons Problem

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.06984v1
• Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2026 04:11:48 GMT
• Title: Modeling Misinformation as a Commons Problem
• Abstract summary: This paper presents an agent-based simulation that frames trust as a collective resource and attention as a scarce private budget.<n>Across experiments, the model produces four recurring modes: credible stability, misinformation dominance, polarization, and a mixed baseline.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Misinformation often harms society not just by spreading a single false belief, but by breaking down the shared trust people rely on to evaluate what is true. This paper presents an agent-based simulation that frames trust as a collective resource and attention as a scarce private budget: when aggregate attention shifts toward low credibility content, the trust environment degrades, making credible information harder to process and correct. Across experiments, the model produces four recurring modes: credible stability, misinformation dominance, polarization, and a mixed baseline, with distinct signatures in trust trajectories and network structure. The results separate two control problems that matter for simulation-based policy exploration: the balance of trust repair versus harm largely determines whether the system recovers or collapses, while homophily and rewiring determine whether disagreement remains integrated or separates into persistent clusters. This foundation provides a transparent testbed for comparative experiments on interventions that must address both trust restoration and structural conditions for cross-cutting exposure.

Related papers

• Learning Whom to Trust : Decision-Generated Credibility in Social Learning [0.7734726150561086]
  Social interaction can improve collective learning but also amplify early mistakes.<n>We study this tension when the credibility of social information is generated by the sender's own decision process rather than fixed ex ante.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T17:39:32Z)
• COSMO: Consensus-Driven Shift Modulation for Source-Free Domain Adaptation [79.43842208099619]
  Source-free domain adaptation (SFDA) adapts a source-trained model to an unlabeled target domain without source data.<n>We formulate VLM-guided SFDA as a sample-wise reliability-allocation problem.<n>We propose Consensus-Driven Shift Modulation (COSMO) to replace expert-to-expert guidance with co-adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T09:10:30Z)
• Rethinking Modality Reliability in Multimodal Sentiment Analysis with Incomplete Observations [9.993152436695421]
  We argue that modality reliability is a central variable in incomplete-observation settings. Failure to model it explicitly gives rise to two related issues.<n>We propose Modality Reliability-Calibrated Framework for Multimodal Sentiment Analysis with incomplete observations.<n> MRCF contains a Reliability-Aware Branch that estimates sample-specific modality reliability from intramodal quality cues and cross-modal semantic consistency.<n>Experiments on CMU-MOSI, CMU-MOSEI, and CH-SIMS show that MRCF achieves strong performance under standard incomplete-observation protocols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T13:02:48Z)
• Adaptive Modality Reliability Diagnosis and Restoration for Robust Multimodal Intent Recognition [2.2012643583422347]
  Multimodal intent recognition combines linguistic, acoustic, and visual evidence, but individual modalities may be noisy, missing, semantically conflicting, or disproportionately dominant.<n>We propose PRIME, a closed-loop reliability guided framework that jointly diagnoses, restores, and reassesses modality quality at the sample level.<n> Experiments on multimodal intent-recognition benchmarks show that PRIME maintains competitive clean-data performance while improving under missing, noisy, conflicting, and modality-imbalanced conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T11:14:13Z)
• Conformal Changepoint Localization and Root Cause Analysis with Corrupted Observations [55.76952683833966]
  This paper proposes weighted CONCH (W-CONCH) and weighted CROC (W-CROC) to reduce confidence set size when data may be corrupted.<n>Experiments on image-based and real-world changepoint and root-cause benchmarks show that uncertainty-based weighting substantially reduces confidence set size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T05:16:59Z)
• TCHG: Tri-Trust Conditioned Heterogeneous Graph Learning for Reliable Dynamic Trust Prediction [5.435667023660699]
  Graph neural networks have become a prominent approach to trust prediction because of their ability to learn network structures and complex trust dependencies.<n>This paper argues that trust evidence should not be treated as an undifferentiated input, but should be used as functional control factors over graph propagation.<n>We propose TCHG, a tri-trust conditioned heterogeneous graph learning framework that decomposes trust evidence into three channels and assigns them distinct functional roles in propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T12:01:34Z)
• LLMs Show No Signs Of Individuated Metacognition [0.023227405857540805]
  We decompose binary confidence judgements from 20 Large Language Models.<n>We ask whether two models that differ in confidence also differ in performance.<n>We find no evidence for significant verbalised individuated metacognition in any tested domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-22T23:54:33Z)
• ERA: Evidence-based Reliability Alignment for Honest Retrieval-Augmented Generation [19.616905640490252]
  We propose a new framework called ERA (Evidence-based Reliability Alignment) to enhance abstention behavior in RAG systems.<n>Our approach significantly outperforms baselines, optimizing the trade-off between answer coverage and abstention with superior calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T01:45:51Z)
• Epistemic Context Learning: Building Trust the Right Way in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems [94.9141394384021]
  Individual agents in multi-agent systems often lack robustness, tending to blindly conform to misleading peers.<n>We show this weakness stems from both sycophancy and inadequate ability to evaluate peer reliability.<n>We first formalize the learning problem of history-aware reference, introducing the historical interactions of peers as additional input.<n>We then develop Epistemic Context Learning (ECL), a reasoning framework that conditions predictions on explicitly-built peer profiles from history.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T13:59:32Z)
• Illusions of Confidence? Diagnosing LLM Truthfulness via Neighborhood Consistency [78.91846841708586]
  We show that even facts answered with perfect self-consistency can rapidly collapse under mild contextual interference.<n>We propose Neighbor-Consistency Belief (NCB), a structural measure of belief that evaluates response coherence across a conceptual neighborhood.<n>We also present Structure-Aware Training (SAT), which optimize context-invariant belief structure and reduces long-tail knowledge brittleness by approximately 30%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-09T16:23:21Z)
• Aurora: Are Android Malware Classifiers Reliable and Stable under Distribution Shift? [51.12297424766236]
  AURORA is a framework to evaluate malware classifiers based on their confidence quality and operational resilience.<n>AURORA is complemented by a set of metrics designed to go beyond point-in-time performance.<n>The fragility in SOTA frameworks across datasets of varying drift suggests the need for a return to the whiteboard.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T20:22:43Z)
• TrustLoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation for Failure Detection under Out-of-distribution Data [62.22804234013273]
  We propose a simple failure detection framework to unify and facilitate classification with rejection under both covariate and semantic shifts.<n>Our key insight is that by separating and consolidating failure-specific reliability knowledge with low-rank adapters, we can enhance the failure detection ability effectively and flexibly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-20T09:20:55Z)
• Navigating Conflicting Views: Harnessing Trust for Learning [5.776290041122041]
  We develop a computational trust-based discounting method that enhances the Evidential Multi-view framework.<n>We evaluate our method on six real-world datasets using Top-1 Accuracy, Fleiss' Kappa, and a new metric, Multi-View Agreement with Ground Truth.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T03:22:18Z)
• Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs [54.262044436203965]
  We introduce a holistic auditing framework that comprehensively evaluates synthetic datasets and AI models. It focuses on preventing bias and discrimination, ensures fidelity to the source data, assesses utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We demonstrate the framework's effectiveness by auditing various generative models across diverse use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T09:03:18Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.