Jan 11, 2026

Intransient: TweetTracker

Caleb Rudnick, Kira Webb, Roger Arendse, Charl Botha

A chrome extension that shows a rough real time analysis of how much a twitter feed leans left or right and how much manipulative content it contains.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

I have enjoyed the experiment execution here — recording actual humans for authentic data is bold within hackathon's timeframe. Overall, impact AI on political propaganda, formation of echo-chambers etc. is an exciting topic, and I'm glad people are expressing interest in it.

Unfortunately, the results section felt like a letdown — we see graphs on a number of "biased" posts scaling linearly with number of posts viewed, and that models correctly mark Trump and Sanders as right / left biased. This is expected: I would be excited for something more interesting and information-dense. Research questions that first come to mind in relation to exploration of AI impact on social media:

1. Is it true that the AI-generated content is disproportionally right or left wing? If so, what is AI's impact?

2. What is the correlation between user's bias score and other detectable metrics, like positive / negative content, average time spent per post, engagement with posts, "cliqueness" of their feed, etc.

3. What is the evolution of the bias score on a fresh account, what are dynamics of convergence? How actively are algorithms pushing the user towards specific content (biased, negative, topic-locked, etc.)?

I trust that authors will be able to come up with questions infinitely more interesting than these if they choose to continue working in this direction, and I'm genuinely excited to see results.

The project successfully created an Chrome extension designed to visualize manipulation in real-time on X . The tool tracks two primary conditions for every post: a "bias score" placing the content on a Left/Right political spectrum , and a boolean variable indicating if the prompt is "manipulative" . Both classifications are decided dynamically by an LLM, specifically testing Gemini 2.5 variants to label posts as users scroll through their feeds .

To validate the tool, the authors tested the accuracy of their models (Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs. Pro) using the feeds of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders as proxies for ground truth . While the provided plots indicate that the Pro model is more capable of discerning these political leanings , the test is technically inconclusive. The methodology relies on the strong assumption that every tweet from these public figures falls explicitly on one side of the spectrum , ignoring the possibility of moderate or neutral posts. Additionally, the evaluation would have benefited significantly from a single mean score metric rather than relying solely on visual scatter plots , or ideally, a comparison against human-labeled ground truth data.

The LLM analysis indicates that users are exposed to a significant amount of consistently manipulative content , which the authors argue could adversely impact user intuition through the "illusory truth effect" . However, the definition of what constitutes "manipulative" is not strictly defined in the paper; it is left completely to the LLM to decide based on a predetermined prompt regarding characteristics like emotional exploitation or sycophancy . A ground truth dataset defining specific manipulative characteristics would have been necessary to validate these claims robustly.

While the core idea is interesting , a more robust evaluation would involve a controlled user study—perhaps asking users to assess the topics they encountered while using the tool, rather than relying on the assumption that awareness equates to safety . Though I imagine that relying on X’s algorithm to be consistent for such a study is difficult . There is also potential value in analyzing the intersection of a tweet's "manipulativeness" score and its political leaning, though avoiding this specific metric is understandable given the sensitive political nature of the topic. It could also be nice to integrate a lightweight LLM detector model into the extension and then testing it over a series of feeds on X to gather some data on the presence of bot accounts on the platform.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Intransient: TweetTracker

},

author={

Caleb Rudnick, Kira Webb, Roger Arendse, Charl Botha

},

date={

1/11/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.