Frankly Speaking: The Company Election Integrity Keeps in Congressional Communication

Michael A. Robinette; Christina Barsky; Amanda D. Clark; Helen Flannery; Juniper Lovato

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.36187

Frankly Speaking: The Company Election Integrity Keeps in Congressional Communication

Michael A. Robinette·Christina Barsky·Amanda D. Clark·Helen Flannery·Juniper Lovato

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Election integrity is a shared commitment in American politics, but Democrats and Republicans in Congress increasingly mean different things by it. Analyzing 10,420 congressional e-newsletters sent from 2010 to 2025, we examine how the two parties invoke election terms such as ``integrity,'' ``security,'' and ``fraud.'' Using diachronic word embeddings, which track semantic change through how words are used in context, we measure how differently each party uses each term, how much each party shifts, and whether they share nearest semantic neighbors. We show that members of Congress do not need different words to tell different stories about elections. They need only place those same words in different company. Across nearly every term and year, the two parties surround election-integrity vocabulary with entirely different words. That divergence is easy to miss, because most election vocabulary is no more divergent than other words used at roughly the same frequency, and neither party's usage shifted more than the other's. Only a subset of terms grew more divergent, most notably ``certification,'' while ``rigged'' and ``stolen'' entered election discourse after 2020 and polarized there. By 2024, Democrats surround ``voter,'' ``election,'' and ``integrity'' with the language of access and administration. Republicans surround the same terms with ``citizenship verification,'' ``noncitizen voting,'' and ``border security.'' For one party, integrity means protecting eligible voters' ability to cast a ballot. For the other, it means protecting the electoral process from illegitimate ballots. Election officials, who must administer a single system under both definitions, inherit this tension.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Michael A. Robinette, Christina Barsky, Amanda D. Clark, Helen Flannery, Juniper Lovato. 2026-10-26. Frankly Speaking: The Company Election Integrity Keeps in Congressional Communication. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.36187

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Counting Clues: A Lightweight Probabilistic Baseline Can Match an LLM

Large language models (LLMs) excel on multiple-choice clinical diagnosis benchmarks, yet it is unclear how much of this performance reflects underlying probabilistic reasoning. We study this through questions from MedQA that ask for the most likely diagnosis. We introduce Frequency-Based Probabilistic Ranker (FBPR), a lightweight method that scores options with a smoothed Naive Bayes over concept-diagnosis co-occurrence statistics from a large corpus. When co-occurrence statistics are sourced from Dolma, the pretraining corpus for OLMo, and RedPajama, an open reproduction of the LLaMA pretraining-data recipe, FBPR achieves comparable performance to the corresponding LLMs. Furthermore, direct LLM inference and FBPR exhibit complementary strengths, correctly answering largely different subsets of questions with overlap barely above chance. Combining them with a simple hybrid method yields a notable gain over either method alone. These findings show that explicit probabilistic baselines can account for a substantial portion of the benchmark performance on diagnosis questions, while serving as historically grounded reference points and complementary signals for hybridization.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

TextCloak: Safeguarding Data from Unauthorized LLM Fine-Tuning via RL-Driven Unlearnable Examples

The development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to significant advances across a wide range of language tasks, while simultaneously raising growing concerns about unauthorized online data exploitation and privacy leakage. Unlearnable examples (UEs) emerge as a promising defense by injecting crafted perturbations into data such that models trained on them exhibit degraded utility. However, existing methods for text protection are primarily designed for classification tasks and discriminative language models, which limits their broad applicability (e.g., instruction following or reasoning) in LLMs. In this work, we propose **TextCloak**, an RL-driven data synthesis framework that safeguards textual data against unauthorized LLM fine-tuning. TextCloak employs a *UE generative policy* that transforms clean text into unlearnable examples while preserving semantic fidelity and linguistic naturalness. To optimize the policy, we introduce **GRPO-UE**, which simulates the attacker's LLM fine-tuning and rewards downstream degradation via group-relative policy optimization. This overall formulates a bi-level optimization loop, allowing the generator to discover effective protective patterns. Comprehensive experiments on six publicly available datasets and nine state-of-the-art LLMs demonstrate that TextCloak consistently impairs unauthorized LLM fine-tuning while maintaining text utility for legitimate use. Further analyses confirm its transferability and robustness across model architectures, training configurations, and adaptive attacks, highlighting its broad applicability as a practical defense for online content.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

ReMCTS: Reflection-Enhanced Monte Carlo Tree Search for Code Generation

Open-weight large language models (LLMs) can generate function-level programs from natural-language prompts, but plausible candidates still fail on hidden semantics and repeat mistakes across repair attempts. We present ReMCTS, an execution-grounded, memory-augmented, LLM-guided MCTS-style search framework. It organizes program candidates as tree states, retains branch-local debugging context, retrieves failure experience across branches, and distinguishes failed checks from unavailable evidence. On HumanEval and MBPP-Sanitized, visible-test ReMCTS improves over direct generation in 8 of 10 model-dataset pairs under held-out evaluation, whereas proxy-only search is less stable. Controlled tree-search, sampling, repair, and memory ablations characterize the source and limits of these gains. A 30-task HumanEval-X C++ pilot further demonstrates compatibility with compiler-backed execution, but does not constitute a broad multilingual evaluation.

cs.CL↗