arXiv:2607. 15861v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Moderation systems increasingly rely on external toxicity tools, but those tools are unreliable under code-mixing, transliteration, slang, and language mismatch.
arXiv:2607. 23175v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reducing toxicity is often framed as a global alignment problem, yet perceptions of harmful language are subjective and context-dependent.
arXiv:2608. 14577v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Frontier large language models (LLMs) safety evaluation has largely treated harmful generation as an attack outcome rather than as an object of analysis.
The paper introduces Abusive Language Identification (ALI), a sequence‑labeling approach that simultaneously extracts abusive spans and identifies target mentions, addressing limitations of traditional sentence‑level abusive language classification (ALC). Using a pilot corpus from a production moderation pipeline, the authors compare ALI to ALC, finding that ALI performs competitively while offering localized outputs useful for moderators, with a modest advantage on implicit abuse. However, accurately determining exact abusive boundaries and target spans remains challenging, and the study highlights the need for further research on target‑span linking and structured benchmarks for ALI.
arXiv:2607. 20447v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper describes our system for the EEUCA 2026 Shared Task on toxicity classification in gaming chat.
The paper presents a scalable approach to harmful content moderation on social media by leveraging large language models (LLMs) for few-shot, in-context learning. Experiments across multiple LLMs show that this method outperforms proprietary baselines such as Perspective and OpenAI Moderation, as well as prior few-shot learning techniques, in detecting harmful content. The study also explores the addition of visual cues like video thumbnails to assess multimodal improvements, highlighting the advantages of LLM-based moderation for dynamic and large-scale content filtering.
The paper introduces C$^2$TU, a training‑free and prompt‑free method for uncovering Chinese cloaked toxic content. It uses substring matching with a Chinese homophone graph and toxic lexicon to spot candidate toxic words, then filters non‑toxic candidates and corrects cloaks using two variants—one based on BERT and another on LLMs that overcome auto‑regressive limitations. Experiments on two Chinese toxic datasets show C$^2$TU outperforms the best competitor by up to 71% in F1 score and 35% in accuracy.
arXiv:2609.13579v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety research often focuses on model-generated harms, but users may also direct hostility, coercion, and adversarial pressure at models. Understandin...
arXiv:2609.00361v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Toxic language in digital workplaces such as pejoratives, sarcasm, condescension, and subtle incivility can erode trust, morale, and collaboration. E...
arXiv:2405. 17838v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Socio-linguistic indicators of affectively-relevant phenomena, such as emotion or sentiment, are often extracted from text to better understand features of human-computer interactions, including on social media.
The paper presents a new benchmark for automatically evaluating mental health stigma in online text, featuring a fine‑grained taxonomy that covers stigma mode, domain, and specific components across multiple mental health conditions. The authors annotate naturally occurring news and social media posts and test large language models and classifiers for sentiment, toxicity, and hate speech, finding that these models poorly capture stigma and often overpredict it without explicit rules. The benchmark, annotations, exemplar cases, and code are publicly released on GitHub.
CIBuzzBench is a new benchmark that tests cross‑lingual understanding of Chinese internet buzzwords by providing 3,001 buzzwords with English explanations, equivalents, category labels, and harmfulness annotations. The benchmark defines three tasks—Meaning Explanation, Cross‑lingual Equivalent Matching, and Culturally Grounded Harmfulness Detection—to evaluate how well large language models translate and interpret these culturally nuanced terms. Experiments show that current state‑of‑the‑art LLMs still struggle with fine‑grained non‑literal meanings, robust matching, and accurate harmfulness detection across languages.