Operationalizing Content Moderation “Accuracy” in the Digital Services Act

The Digital Services Act, recently adopted by the EU, requires social media platforms to report the ``accuracy'' of their automated content moderation systems. The colloquial term is vague, or open-textured---the literal accuracy (number of correct predictions divided by the total) is not suitable for problems with large class imbalance, and the ground truth and dataset to measure accuracy against is unspecified. Without further specification, the regulatory requirement allows for deficient reporting. In this interdisciplinary work, we operationalize ``accuracy'' reporting by refining legal concepts and relating them to technical implementation. We start by elucidating the legislative purpose of the Act to legally justify an interpretation of ``accuracy'' as precision and recall. These metrics remain informative in class imbalanced settings, and reflect the proportional balancing of Fundamental Rights of the EU Charter. We then focus on the estimation of recall, as its naive estimation can incur extremely high annotation costs and disproportionately interfere with the platform's right to conduct business. Through a simulation study, we show that recall can be efficiently estimated using stratified sampling with trained classifiers, and provide concrete recommendations for its application. Finally, we present a case study of recall reporting for a subset of Reddit under the Act. Based on the language in the Act, we identify a number of ways recall could be reported due to underspecification. We report on one possibility using our improved estimator, and discuss the implications and areas for further legal clarification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Published
2024-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1609/aies.v7i1.31744
Primary Topic
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Operationalizing Content Moderation “Accuracy” in the Digital Services Act

Robin Jia, Frederike Zufall, Johnny Tian-Zheng Wei
1 links
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
article

Operationalizing Content Moderation “Accuracy” in the Digital Services Act

Robin Jia, Frederike Zufall, Johnny Tian-Zheng Wei
article en

Abstract

The Digital Services Act, recently adopted by the EU, requires social media platforms to report the ``accuracy'' of their automated content moderation systems. The colloquial term is vague, or open-textured---the literal accuracy (number of correct predictions divided by the total) is not suitable for problems with large class imbalance, and the ground truth and dataset to measure accuracy against is unspecified. Without further specification, the regulatory requirement allows for deficient reporting. In this interdisciplinary work, we operationalize ``accuracy'' reporting by refining legal concepts and relating them to technical implementation. We start by elucidating the legislative purpose of the Act to legally justify an interpretation of ``accuracy'' as precision and recall. These metrics remain informative in class imbalanced settings, and reflect the proportional balancing of Fundamental Rights of the EU Charter. We then focus on the estimation of recall, as its naive estimation can incur extremely high annotation costs and disproportionately interfere with the platform's right to conduct business. Through a simulation study, we show that recall can be efficiently estimated using stratified sampling with trained classifiers, and provide concrete recommendations for its application. Finally, we present a case study of recall reporting for a subset of Reddit under the Act. Based on the language in the Act, we identify a number of ways recall could be reported due to underspecification. We report on one possibility using our improved estimator, and discuss the implications and areas for further legal clarification.

Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and SocietyVol. 7
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE), University of Southern California (US), Waseda University (JP), California Southern University (US)
Cisco Systems, Open Philanthropy Project
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.