Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Muhammad Ali 0014

dblp:64/5995-14 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
4as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-4092-1248ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Security and privacy · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Information retrieval · 59% Web and social media mining · 41%
Network and information security
1 paper
Privacy and data protection · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Privacy and data protection › web privacy
online advertising privacy
0.712023
Problematic Advertising and its Disparate Exposure on Facebook · USENIX Security Symposium 2023
Computational social science and digital humanities › algorithmic decision-making
algorithmic fairness
0.512021
Ad Delivery Algorithms: The Hidden Arbiters of Political Messaging · WSDM 2021
Information retrieval › online advertising
ad targeting
0.512021
Ad Delivery Algorithms: The Hidden Arbiters of Political Messaging · WSDM 2021
Web and social media mining › social media marketing
social media advertising
0.212023
Problematic Advertising and its Disparate Exposure on Facebook · USENIX Security Symposium 2023
Web and social media mining
social media analysis
0.112021
Ad Delivery Algorithms: The Hidden Arbiters of Political Messaging · WSDM 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

demographic analysis · 1.0audit study · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Problematic Advertising and its Disparate Exposure on Facebook
Muhammad Ali 0014, Angelica Goetzen, Alan Mislove, Elissa M. Redmiles, Piotr Sapiezynski
USENIX Security Symposium1
2021 Measuring and Mitigating Bias and Harm in Personalized Advertising
abstract
Online personalized advertising is often very effective in identifying relevant audiences for each piece of content, which has led to its widespread adoption. In today’s internet, however, these advertising systems are used not only to market products, but also consequential life opportunities such as employment or housing, as well as socially important political messaging. This has led to increasing concerns about the presence of algorithmic bias and possible discrimination in these important domains — with results showing problematic biases along gender, race, and political affiliation, even when the advertiser might have targeted broadly.
Muhammad Ali 0014
RecSys1
2021 Ad Delivery Algorithms: The Hidden Arbiters of Political Messaging
abstract
Political campaigns are increasingly turning to targeted advertising platforms to inform and mobilize potential voters. The appeal of these platforms stems from their promise to empower advertisers to select (or "target") users who see their messages with great precision, including through inferences about those users' interests and political affiliations. However, prior work has shown that the targeting may not work as intended, as platforms' ad delivery algorithms play a crucial role in selecting which subgroups of the targeted users see the ads. In particular, the platforms can selectively deliver ads to subgroups within the target audiences selected by advertisers in ways that can lead to demographic skews along race and gender lines, and do so without the advertiser's knowledge. In this work we demonstrate that ad delivery algorithms used by Facebook, the most advanced targeted advertising platform, shape the political ad delivery in ways that may not be beneficial to the political campaigns and to societal discourse. In particular, the ad delivery algorithms lead to political messages on Facebook being shown predominantly to people who Facebook thinks already agree with the ad campaign's message even if the political advertiser targets an ideologically diverse audience. Furthermore, an advertiser determined to reach ideologically non-aligned users is non-transparently charged a high premium compared to their more aligned competitor, a difference from traditional broadcast media. Our results demonstrate that Facebook exercises control over who sees which political messages beyond the control of those who pay for them or those who are exposed to them. Taken together, our findings suggest that the political discourse's increased reliance on profit-optimized, non-transparent algorithmic systems comes at a cost of diversity of political views that voters are exposed to. Thus, the work raises important questions of fairness and accountability desiderata for ad delivery algorithms applied to political ads.
Muhammad Ali 0014, Piotr Sapiezynski, Aleksandra Korolova, Alan Mislove, Aaron Rieke
WSDM1
2019 Discrimination through Optimization: How Facebook's Ad Delivery Can Lead to Biased Outcomes
abstract
The enormous financial success of online advertising platforms is partially due to the precise targeting features they offer. Although researchers and journalists have found many ways that advertisers can target---or exclude---particular groups of users seeing their ads, comparatively little attention has been paid to the implications of the platform's ad delivery process, comprised of the platform's choices about which users see which ads. It has been hypothesized that this process can "skew" ad delivery in ways that the advertisers do not intend, making some users less likely than others to see particular ads based on their demographic characteristics. In this paper, we demonstrate that such skewed delivery occurs on Facebook, due to market and financial optimization effects as well as the platform's own predictions about the "relevance" of ads to different groups of users. We find that both the advertiser's budget and the content of the ad each significantly contribute to the skew of Facebook's ad delivery. Critically, we observe significant skew in delivery along gender and racial lines for "real" ads for employment and housing opportunities despite neutral targeting parameters. Our results demonstrate previously unknown mechanisms that can lead to potentially discriminatory ad delivery, even when advertisers set their targeting parameters to be highly inclusive. This underscores the need for policymakers and platforms to carefully consider the role of the ad delivery optimization run by ad platforms themselves---and not just the targeting choices of advertisers---in preventing discrimination in digital advertising.
Muhammad Ali 0014, Piotr Sapiezynski, Miranda Bogen, Aleksandra Korolova, Alan Mislove, Aaron Rieke
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.1