Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

Cohesion-6K: An Arabic Dataset for Analyzing Social Cohesion and Conflict in Online Discourse

Aisha Ali Al-Athba, Wajdi Zaghouani

Published

May 21, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

15/100 (Low)

Extraction confidence

45% (Low)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Domain Experts

Signals refreshed

May 21, 2026

Open arXiv Find implementation Shortlist (0) RSS feed

Tags

Automatic Metrics

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

What to verify

Validate the exact study setup in the full paper before operational use.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Human feedback signal
Not explicit
Not explicit in abstract metadata
Evaluation signal
Detected
Eval setup described
Usefulness for eval research
15/100
Adjacent candidate

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here

Human Eval Papers LLM-as-Judge Papers Pairwise Preference Papers Tool-Use Evaluation Search

Abstract

The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization. While much research has focused on detecting overt toxicity, the subtle dynamics of social cohesion, meaning the interaction between divisive and unifying narratives, remain computationally underexplored (Bail, 2021; Gonzalez-Bailon and Lelkes, 2023). This paper presents Cohesion-6K, a manually and ChatGPT-assisted annotated dataset of six thousand Arabic public Facebook posts related to the Israeli Occupation of Palestine. Each post is assigned to one of five discourse categories that represent a continuum from conflict to cohesion: Conflict, Resolution, Community Engagement, Supportive Interactions, and Shared Values. The annotation process combines expert human judgment with model-assisted pre-labeling verified by trained annotators, achieving substantial inter-annotator agreement (Cohens kappa = 0.85). Quantitative analysis reveals a consistent engagement gap, where conflict-oriented posts receive between two and four times more user interaction than resolution-oriented ones (p < 0.01). This pattern illustrates how divisive discourse tends to attract disproportionate visibility in Arabic social media spaces. Cohesion-6K provides a transparent and reproducible resource for the study of online cohesion and polarization. The dataset, annotation guidelines, and preprocessing code will be released for research use under an open license, supporting future work in computational social science, digital communication, and Arabic natural language processing.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization."

Quality Controls

partial

Calibration, Inter Annotator Agreement Reported

Calibration/adjudication style controls detected.

"The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization."

Reported Metrics

partial

Kappa, Agreement, Toxicity

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"While much research has focused on detecting overt toxicity, the subtle dynamics of social cohesion, meaning the interaction between divisive and unifying narratives, remain computationally underexplored (Bail, 2021; Gonzalez-Bailon and Lelkes, 2023)."

Rater Population

partial

Domain Experts

Helpful for staffing comparability.

"The annotation process combines expert human judgment with model-assisted pre-labeling verified by trained annotators, achieving substantial inter-annotator agreement (Cohens kappa = 0.85)."

Benchmarks and datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported metrics

kappaagreementtoxicity
Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
No
Feedback types
None
Rater population
Domain Experts
Expertise required
Coding
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
Automatic Metrics
Agentic eval
None
Quality controls
Calibration, Inter Annotator Agreement Reported
Evidence quality
Low
Use this page as
Background context only

Research brief

Metadata summary

The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • The study of online discourse has become central to understanding societal polarization.
  • While much research has focused on detecting overt toxicity, the subtle dynamics of social cohesion, meaning the interaction between divisive and unifying narratives, remain computationally underexplored (Bail, 2021; Gonzalez-Bailon and Lelkes, 2023).
  • This paper presents Cohesion-6K, a manually and ChatGPT-assisted annotated dataset of six thousand Arabic public Facebook posts related to the Israeli Occupation of Palestine.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries

Expert verification evaluation Crowd/annotator signal evaluation Agreement / Kappa

Contribution summary

  • The annotation process combines expert human judgment with model-assisted pre-labeling verified by trained annotators, achieving substantial inter-annotator agreement (Cohens kappa = 0.85).

Why it matters for eval

  • The annotation process combines expert human judgment with model-assisted pre-labeling verified by trained annotators, achieving substantial inter-annotator agreement (Cohens kappa = 0.85).

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Quality control reporting appears

    Detected: Calibration, Inter Annotator Agreement Reported

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Metric reporting is present

    Detected: kappa, agreement, toxicity