Untangling Hate Speech Definitions: A Semantic Componential Analysis Across Cultures and Domains

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07417v1
• Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 22:44:29 GMT
• Title: Untangling Hate Speech Definitions: A Semantic Componential Analysis Across Cultures and Domains
• Authors: Katerina Korre, Arianna Muti, Federico Ruggeri, Alberto Barrón-Cedeño,
• Abstract summary: We create the first dataset of definitions derived from five domains: online dictionaries, research papers, Wikipedia articles, legislation, and online platforms. Our analysis reveals that the components differ from definition to definition, yet many domains borrow definitions from one another without taking into account the target culture.
• Score: 12.964629786324032
• License:
• Abstract: Hate speech relies heavily on cultural influences, leading to varying individual interpretations. For that reason, we propose a Semantic Componential Analysis (SCA) framework for a cross-cultural and cross-domain analysis of hate speech definitions. We create the first dataset of definitions derived from five domains: online dictionaries, research papers, Wikipedia articles, legislation, and online platforms, which are later analyzed into semantic components. Our analysis reveals that the components differ from definition to definition, yet many domains borrow definitions from one another without taking into account the target culture. We conduct zero-shot model experiments using our proposed dataset, employing three popular open-sourced LLMs to understand the impact of different definitions on hate speech detection. Our findings indicate that LLMs are sensitive to definitions: responses for hate speech detection change according to the complexity of definitions used in the prompt.

Related papers

• Definition generation for lexical semantic change detection [3.7297237438000788]
  We use contextualized word definitions generated by large language models as semantic representations in the task of diachronic lexical semantic change detection (LSCD) In short, generated definitions are used as senses', and the change score of a target word is retrieved by comparing their distributions in two time periods under comparison. Our approach is on par with or outperforms prior non-supervised LSCD methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T10:13:08Z)
• "You Are An Expert Linguistic Annotator": Limits of LLMs as Analyzers of Abstract Meaning Representation [60.863629647985526]
  We examine the successes and limitations of the GPT-3, ChatGPT, and GPT-4 models in analysis of sentence meaning structure. We find that models can reliably reproduce the basic format of AMR, and can often capture core event, argument, and modifier structure. Overall, our findings indicate that these models out-of-the-box can capture aspects of semantic structure, but there remain key limitations in their ability to support fully accurate semantic analyses or parses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T21:47:59Z)
• Towards Legally Enforceable Hate Speech Detection for Public Forums [29.225955299645978]
  This research introduces a new perspective and task for enforceable hate speech detection. We use a dataset annotated on violations of eleven possible definitions by legal experts. Given the challenge of identifying clear, legally enforceable instances of hate speech, we augment the dataset with expert-generated samples and an automatically mined challenge set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T04:34:41Z)
• A Category-theoretical Meta-analysis of Definitions of Disentanglement [97.34033555407403]
  Disentangling the factors of variation in data is a fundamental concept in machine learning. This paper presents a meta-analysis of existing definitions of disentanglement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-11T15:24:20Z)
• Neighboring Words Affect Human Interpretation of Saliency Explanations [65.29015910991261]
  Word-level saliency explanations are often used to communicate feature-attribution in text-based models. Recent studies found that superficial factors such as word length can distort human interpretation of the communicated saliency scores. We investigate how the marking of a word's neighboring words affect the explainee's perception of the word's importance in the context of a saliency explanation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-04T09:50:25Z)
• Are Representations Built from the Ground Up? An Empirical Examination of Local Composition in Language Models [91.3755431537592]
  Representing compositional and non-compositional phrases is critical for language understanding. We first formulate a problem of predicting the LM-internal representations of longer phrases given those of their constituents. While we would expect the predictive accuracy to correlate with human judgments of semantic compositionality, we find this is largely not the case.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T14:21:30Z)
• Hate Speech Criteria: A Modular Approach to Task-Specific Hate Speech Definitions [1.3274508420845537]
  We present textithate speech criteria, developed with perspectives from law and social science. We argue that the goal and exact task developers have in mind should determine how the scope of textithate speech is defined.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T17:50:16Z)
• Highly Generalizable Models for Multilingual Hate Speech Detection [0.0]
  Hate speech detection has become an important research topic within the past decade. We compile a dataset of 11 languages and resolve different by analyzing the combined data with binary labels: hate speech or not hate speech. We conduct three types of experiments for a binary hate speech classification task: Multilingual-Train Monolingual-Test, MonolingualTrain Monolingual-Test and Language-Family-Train Monolingual Test scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T03:09:38Z)
• Addressing the Challenges of Cross-Lingual Hate Speech Detection [115.1352779982269]
  In this paper we focus on cross-lingual transfer learning to support hate speech detection in low-resource languages. We leverage cross-lingual word embeddings to train our neural network systems on the source language and apply it to the target language. We investigate the issue of label imbalance of hate speech datasets, since the high ratio of non-hate examples compared to hate examples often leads to low model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T20:48:14Z)
• Latent Hatred: A Benchmark for Understanding Implicit Hate Speech [22.420275418616242]
  This work introduces a theoretically-justified taxonomy of implicit hate speech and a benchmark corpus with fine-grained labels for each message. We present systematic analyses of our dataset using contemporary baselines to detect and explain implicit hate speech.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-11T16:52:56Z)
• Words aren't enough, their order matters: On the Robustness of Grounding Visual Referring Expressions [87.33156149634392]
  We critically examine RefCOg, a standard benchmark for visual referring expression recognition. We show that 83.7% of test instances do not require reasoning on linguistic structure. We propose two methods, one based on contrastive learning and the other based on multi-task learning, to increase the robustness of ViLBERT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-04T17:09:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.