Thank you for tuning in to this audio only podcast presentation. This is week 139 of The Lindahl Letter publication. A new edition arrives every Friday. This week the topic under consideration for The Lindahl Letter is, “Machine learning election models.”

This might be the year that I finally finish that book about the intersection of technology and modernity. During the course of this post we will look at the intersection of machine learning and election models. That could very well be a thin slice of the intersection of technology and modernity at large, but that is the set of questions that brought us here today. It’s one of things we have been chasing along this journey. Oh yes, a bunch of papers exist related to the topic this week of machine learning and election models [1]. None of them are highly cited. A few of them are in the 20’s in terms of citation count, but that means the academic community surrounding this topic is rather limited. Maybe the papers are written, but have just not arrived yet out in the world of publication. Given that machine learning has an active preprint landscape that is unlikely. 

That darth of literature is not going to stop me from looking at them and sharing a few that stood out during the search. None of these papers is approaching the subject from a generative AI model side of things they are using machine learning without any degree of agency. Obviously, I was engaging in this literature review to see if I could find examples of the deployment of models with some type of agency doing analysis within this space of election prediction models. My searching over the last few weeks has not yielded anything super interesting. I was looking for somebody in the academic space doing some type of work within generative AI constitutions and election models or maybe even some work in the space of rolling sentiment analysis for targeted campaign understanding. That is probably an open area for research that will be filled at some point.

Here are 4 articles:

Grimmer, J., Roberts, M. E., & Stewart, B. M. (2021). Machine learning for social science: An agnostic approach. Annual Review of Political Science, 24, 395-419. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-polisci-053119-015921 

Sucharitha, Y., Vijayalata, Y., & Prasad, V. K. (2021). Predicting election results from twitter using machine learning algorithms. Recent Advances in Computer Science and Communications (Formerly: Recent Patents on Computer Science), 14(1), 246-256. www.cse.griet.ac.in/pdfs/journals20-21/SC17.pdf  

Miranda, E., Aryuni, M., Hariyanto, R., & Surya, E. S. (2019, August). Sentiment Analysis using Sentiwordnet and Machine Learning Approach (Indonesia general election opinion from the twitter content). In 2019 International conference on information management and technology (ICIMTech) (Vol. 1, pp. 62-67). IEEE. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335945861_Sentiment_Analysis_using_Sentiwordnet_and_Machine_Learning_Approach_Indonesia_general_election_opinion_from_the_twitter_content 

Zhang, M., Alvarez, R. M., & Levin, I. (2019). Election forensics: Using machine learning and synthetic data for possible election anomaly detection. PloS one, 14(10), e0223950. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223950&type=printable 

My guess is that we are going to see a wave of ChatGPT related articles about elections post the 2024 presidential cycle. It will probably be one of those waves of articles without any of them really standing out or making any serious contribution to the academy. 

The door is opening to a new world of election prediction and understanding efforts thanks to the recent changes in both model agency and generative AI models that help evaluate and summarize very complex things. It’s really about how they are applied to something going forward that will make the biggest difference in how the use cases play out. These use cases by the way are going to become very visible as the 2024 election comes into focus. The interesting part of the whole equation will be when people are bringing custom knowledge bases to the process to help fuel interactions with machine learning algorithms and generative AI. 

It’s amazing to think how rapidly things can be built. The older models of software engineering are now more of a history lesson than a primer on building things with prompt-based AI. Andrew Ng illustrated in a recent lecture the rapidly changing build times. You have to really decide what you want to build and deploy and make it happen. Ferris Bueller once said, “Life moves pretty fast.” Now code generation is starting to move even faster! You need to stop and look around at what is possible, or you just might miss out on the generative AI revolution.

You can see Andrew’s full video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p248yoa3oE 

Footnotes:

[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=Machine+learning+election+models&btnG= 

What’s next for The Lindahl Letter? 

• Week 140: Proxy models for elections
• Week 141: Building generative AI chatbots
• Week 142: Learning LangChain
• Week 143: Social media analysis
• Week 144: Knowledge graphs vs. vector databases

If you enjoyed this content, then please take a moment and share it with a friend. If you are new to The Lindahl Letter, then please consider subscribing. New editions arrive every Friday. Thank you and enjoy the week ahead.