REVIEW 4 cited by
HateBERT: Retraining BERT for Abusive Language Detection in English
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In this paper, we introduce HateBERT, a re-trained BERT model for abusive language detection in English. The model was trained on RAL-E, a large-scale dataset of Reddit comments in English from communities banned for being offensive, abusive, or hateful that we have collected and made available to the public. We present the results of a detailed comparison between a general pre-trained language model and the abuse-inclined version obtained by retraining with posts from the banned communities on three English datasets for offensive, abusive language and hate speech detection tasks. In all datasets, HateBERT outperforms the corresponding general BERT model. We also discuss a battery of experiments comparing the portability of the generic pre-trained language model and its corresponding abusive language-inclined counterpart across the datasets, indicating that portability is affected by compatibility of the annotated phenomena.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Fine-Grained Chinese Hate Speech Understanding: Span-Level Resources, Coded Term Lexicon, and Enhanced Detection Frameworks
The paper creates a span-level Chinese hate speech dataset and a 830-term coded hate lexicon, but its two-stage training method's reported superiority is contradicted by the paper's own COLD results.
-
Rethinking Hate Speech Detection on Social Media: Can LLMs Replace Traditional Models?
On three hate speech datasets, including a new code-mixed IndoHateMix benchmark, fine-tuned LLMs such as LLaMA-3.1 beat multilingual BERT models, with the largest gains on code-mixed Indian text.
-
Is LLM an Overconfident Judge? Unveiling the Capabilities of LLMs in Detecting Offensive Language with Annotation Disagreement
LLMs become less accurate and more overconfident as human annotator agreement drops, and training on disagreement samples improves in-domain accuracy and confidence alignment.
-
Dynamic Content Moderation in Livestreams: Combining Supervised Classification with MLLM-Boosted Similarity Matching
A deployed hybrid moderation system combining supervised classification and reference-based similarity matching, boosted by MLLM distillation, reduces unwanted livestream views by 6–8%.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.