arXiv:2608.22018v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Hate speech detection has recently shifted from coarse-grained classification to structured parsing, where systems must jointly identify hateful target...
The paper introduces a scope‑conditioned generation framework that incorporates structured stereotype characteristics into prompts for large language models, aiming to improve the quality of counterspeech against online hate speech. The authors validate the method on a new, human‑curated dataset in English, Italian, and Spanish, showing significant gains over generic baselines in factuality, specificity, cogency, and effectiveness for both explicit and implicit stereotypes.
Counterspeech (CS) - direct responses that counter online Hate Speech (HS) using reasoning and alternative viewpoints - has emerged as an alternative to content removal. Current automatic CS generatio...
The paper proposes a training‑time explainability framework that aligns model reasoning with human‑annotated rationales to improve both classification performance and interpretability for multilingual hate speech detection. It is evaluated on HateXplain (English) and BullySent (Hinglish), datasets that capture anti‑Muslim hate in culturally coded, multilingual forms. Using methods such as LIME, Integrated Gradients, Grad‑X‑Input, and attention, the study shows that gradient‑ and attention‑based regularization boosts F‑scores, enhances plausibility and faithfulness, and captures culturally specific cues for detecting implicit anti‑Muslim hate.
The paper introduces FAID, a fine‑grained adaptive framework for detecting implicit hate speech. It first classifies samples into Shallow, Targeted, or Context‑Dependent categories and then applies tailored strategies—prompt‑tuning for shallow cases, knowledge augmentation for targeted ones, and an agentic prompt‑generation system for context‑dependent posts. Experiments on four benchmark datasets show that FAID outperforms state‑of‑the‑art baselines by allocating computational effort only where needed.
arXiv:2608.23152v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Counterspeech effectively neutralizes the impact of online hate. Although prior work explores automated counterspeech generation, it largely emphasizes...
arXiv:2601. 11178v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Social media platforms are increasingly dominated by long-form multimodal content, where harmful narratives are constructed through a complex interplay of audio, visual, and textual cues.
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive performance across a wide range of general NLP tasks; however, their effectiveness in sensitive domains, such as hate speech detection, remains less...
The paper presents an instruction‑tuned large language model (LLM) based on Qwen3 that is fine‑tuned for hate speech mitigation by unifying 36 English hate speech datasets. The authors show that this generalist LLM achieves state‑of‑the‑art performance on in‑domain benchmarks and delivers significant gains in cross‑domain and cross‑lingual generalization, outperforming specialist encoder‑based classifiers.
arXiv:2610.12701v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Perspectivist NLP has established that annotator positionality shapes labels for subjective tasks, but the field still lacks methods for operationalisi...
arXiv:2606. 18852v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Classifying implicit hate speech remains a challenge, as intent is often masked through insinuation and context rather than explicit slurs.
The paper investigates how annotator-style rebuttals can manipulate large language model (LLM) moderation systems, either by whitewashing hateful content as normal or smearing normal content as hateful. Using a rejudge protocol that adds decision‑boundary perturbations and adversarial rationales, the authors show that such rebuttals significantly degrade moderation performance, especially in multi‑turn settings. The study finds consistent, model‑specific asymmetries between the two manipulation directions and demonstrates that explicit reasoning prompts and defensive instructions mitigate but do not eliminate the vulnerability.