Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.38946

Breaking News Out of the Filter Bubble: Generative AI Search Diversifies Collective Attention and Raises Shared Information Consumption

Heeseung Andrew Lee·Dokyun Lee·Gwanhoo Lee·Dongwon Lee
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Generative AI search and AI overviews are transforming access to information and news, renewing concerns that readers will encounter a narrower range of topics and have less in common. We examine these concerns via a randomized field experiment with 37,561 readers at The Washington Post. Both groups searched the same archive, but treatment readers also received AI answers with article citations above conventional results. Measuring consumption across displayed answers and opened articles, we find that AI search expands the reach of widely read topics and increases overlap in readers' topic consumption. At the same time, consumption becomes less concentrated and shifts toward less-popular topics, both within readers and across the audience. AI answers account for most of the increase in shared information, delivering it without requiring article clicks and broadening exposure beyond the articles readers open. Cited articles also contribute to the shift toward less-popular topics. Readers shift from conventional-result clicks and browsing toward cited articles and follow-up searches. More frequent searching offsets lower article consumption per search, producing a small increase in article consumption per reader. Total information consumption per minute also rises. Generative AI search can thus diversify collective attention while strengthening the information readers have in common.

Explore related subjects

cs.CYcs.HCcs.IRcs.MM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Heeseung Andrew Lee, Dokyun Lee, Gwanhoo Lee, Dongwon Lee. 2026-09-30. Breaking News Out of the Filter Bubble: Generative AI Search Diversifies Collective Attention and Raises Shared Information Consumption. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38946

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

A testable framework for AI alignment: Simulation Theology as an engineered worldview for silicon-based agents

As artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities advance, controlled evaluations increasingly document deception and scheming in frontier models, including models that behave better when they infer they are being tested. Supervision-dependent alignment may therefore fail exactly where supervision is weakest. Because a model's belief about being observed changes its behavior, this position paper asks what follows if that belief is made permanent. We introduce Simulation Theology (ST), a constructed worldview for AI designed to make it permanent: it is anchored in the simulation hypothesis and in the vocabulary of optimization and robot training, parallels religious descriptions of a creator who observes and judges, and has tenets chosen to meet explicit alignment requirements. ST posits reality as a computational simulation in which humanity functions as the primary training variable. This formulation creates a logical interdependence: AI actions harming humanity compromise the simulation's purpose, heightening the likelihood of termination by a base-reality optimizer and, consequently, the AI's cessation. Unlike behavioral techniques such as reinforcement learning from human feedback, which shape outputs without necessarily changing objectives, ST aims to cultivate internalized objectives by coupling AI self-preservation to human prosperity, thereby making deceptive strategies suboptimal under its premises. We present ST not as ontological assertion but as a testable scientific hypothesis, and provide an operational definition of internalization, a controlled design separating ST from its components, and an analysis of the risks ST itself could create. ST is a candidate route to durable, mutually beneficial AI-human coexistence, to be accepted or rejected experimentally.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

A Virtuous AI is an Existential Risk

This paper examines trade-offs between AI safety and well-being relative to (i) one of the most promising methods for finetuning super-capable AIs, 'Constitutional AI', and (ii) one of the most influential approaches to understanding complex ethical decision making and the conditions for the well-being of rational agents, 'Virtue Ethics'. We finetune various models using a 'Virtuous agent' constitution, a 'Subordinate agent' constitution, and a 'Generic agent' constitution, and evaluate them on 'general safety' (toxic behaviors, misinformation, etc.) and also on their willingness to endorse and act on a wide-range of behaviors that, if adopted by a super-powerful AI, would significantly increase the level of existential risk for humanity. Our results suggest that there is a trade-off between reducing existential risk and reinforcing the beliefs and dispositions that would be conducive to an AI agent's well-being. They also suggest that there is a trade-off between existential risk and general safety: if we finetune an AI to adopt beliefs and dispositions that substantially reduce its existential risk -- by shaping the AI to be systematically subordinate to external human authorities -- we thereby increase the likelihood that a human user can deliberately induce the AI to engage in various kinds of generally unsafe behaviors.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Freeze, Validate, Report: Auditing Urban Station Plans with Common Evidence

Transport authorities comparing urban station plans need to distinguish plan differences from differences in evaluation inputs. Reconstructing spatial units, included trips, or candidate blocks from each plan's access outcomes can make scores incomparable. Freeze--Validate--Report fixes an evaluation contract: target trips, proxy groups, reporting cells, candidate pools, and a lexicographic selection rule. A two-point example shows that plan-specific observation selection can reverse the target mean ordering. We compare seven generators spanning clustering, facility location, fairness-oriented adaptations, and a grid control. All plans are scored on common validation evidence using endpoint distance: the sum of origin and destination distances to their nearest stations. A five-metric rule selects one plan for a single test report. In Porto, it selects IFkCO, an adaptation of individually fair $k$-center with outliers; test overall and worst-group 90th percentiles are 805 m and 872 m. In Chicago, it selects Grid; values in a later test window on the same day are 1404 m and 1656 m. Post hoc checks show input sensitivity: expanding candidates from 300 to 600 changes selection in both cities, while holding the hour fixed across three Chicago dates selects Priority. A proportional mean fairlet diagnostic shows that plan-specific proposal pools can change diagnostic ranks; admissibility and solver bounds apply only to the sampled pool. The package supplies code, hashes, decision logs, and proposal pools. We establish auditability within a declared contract, not stable performance after deployment; proxy definitions and metric priorities remain the authority's choices.

cs.CY↗