mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Why Does Misinformation Propagate Faster? An Algorithmic Perspective on X

arXiv 2609.28947 ↗First posted 24 Sep 2026cs.SI cs.LG econ.GNcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Misinformation is widely reported to propagate faster on engagement-based platforms, yet prior work largely focused on empirical analysis, without identifying a specific algorithmic mechanism that results in this phenomenon. Thanks to the open-sourcing of X's recommendation algorithms, we conduct what is, to our knowledge, the first component-level study of the recommendation algorithm deployed by a social media platform, which examines how each of its components affects misinformation propagation. Specifically, we identify the engagement fungibility mechanism in the algorithm, where the final recommendation score is constructed as a weighted sum of all predicted user activities. As a result, a tweet can be repeatedly recommended simply because it is predicted to draw many instant reactions (e.g., likes and retweets), even when it is not expected to draw thoughtful responses (e.g., replies and quotes). Since misinformation typically draws a larger share of its engagement from instant reactions, this mechanism enables it to receive more recommendation exposure and to propagate faster. To empirically validate this mechanism, we re-implement X's recommendation algorithm on the USC X 2024 election corpus, and build a calibrated simulation study to analyze the impact of different scoring rules. We find that re-tuning the metric weights has little or even a negative impact on reducing the credibility exposure gap, while those scoring rules that set a precondition of thoughtful engagement for amplification would be able to alleviate the gap significantly, across 46 robustness checks. Our diagnosis, therefore, yields a simple and deployable fix, a reflective-threshold gate that withholds amplification until a tweet is predicted to draw thoughtful engagement, which we find to reallocate exposure away from low-credibility content at no cost to mainstream exposure and with no loss of engagement.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Sep 2026.

Builds on

12 of 53 references.

References · 12

  1. 2017How Algorithmic Confounding in Recommendation Systems Increases Homogeneity and Decreases Utilitycited by 120
  2. 2019Auditing Radicalization Pathways on YouTubecited by 53
  3. 2021MaskNet: Introducing Feature-Wise Multiplication to CTR Ranking Models by Instance-Guided Maskcited by 48
  4. 2021Algorithmic Amplification of Politics on Twittercited by 38
  5. 2022The Challenge of Understanding What Users Want: Inconsistent Preferences and Engagement Optimizationcited by 29
  6. 2020Examining the consumption of radical content on YouTubecited by 13
  7. 2024Auditing Political Exposure Bias: Algorithmic Amplification on Twitter/X During the 2024 U.S. Presidential Electioncited by 8
  8. 2022Diffusion of Community Fact-Checked Misinformation on Twittercited by 7
  9. 2024A Public Dataset Tracking Social Media Discourse about the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election on Twitter/Xcited by 7
  10. 2019Quantifying the Vulnerabilities of the Online Public Square to Adversarial Manipulation Tacticscited by 6
  11. 2022Mechanisms of True and False Rumor Sharing in Social Media: Collective Intelligence or Herd Behavior?cited by 5
  12. 2023Evaluating Twitter's Algorithmic Amplification of Low-Credibility Content: An Observational Studycited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.