Key findings
- Content-based classification using LLMs consistently demonstrates strong accuracy across various influence campaigns, even more recent operations.
- Metadata-based approaches also achieve promising results, sometimes outperforming content-based methods.
- LLM-based methods show better generalization than traditional linguistic-cue baselines, which degrade significantly on recent, more sophisticated campaigns.
- The paper uses Llama 2 with zero-shot and few-shot prompting via Microsoft Guidance, plus fine-tuning with Llama Factory.
- Evaluated against established datasets: Twitter Information Operations, Russian Twitter Trolls, and campaigns from Egypt, Ecuador, and Venezuela.
Methodology
The authors propose four classification models based on:
- Content analysis — using LLM features extracted from tweets
- User interaction — analyzing user engagement patterns
- User centrality — leveraging network structure and graph properties
- User metadata — demographics, account properties, and auxiliary signals
Both tweet-level (binary: in-campaign or organic) and user-level classification (drivers of campaigns vs. organic users) tasks are addressed.
Notes
This is a methodological talk presenting work likely submitted to The Web Conference. The emphasis on cross-campaign generalization is notable — many detection systems degrade when tested on new operations, but these LLM-based approaches maintain performance across geographically diverse campaigns. The use of public influence-operation datasets (Twitter's official disclosures, the Russian troll datasets) makes this reproducible and grounded in real-world threat models.
How it connects
Similar papers
On the Detection of Disinformation Campaign Activity with Network AnalysisDetecting and Tracking the Spread of Astroturf Memes in Microblog StreamsUncovering Coordinated Networks on Social Media: Methods and Case StudiesBirds of a Feather Flock Together: Network-Based Detection of Coordinated Disinformation Campaigns on Telegram