Mimicking How Humans Interpret Out-of-Context Sentences Through Controlled Toxicity Decoding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.08159v1
• Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 08:16:31 GMT
• Title: Mimicking How Humans Interpret Out-of-Context Sentences Through Controlled Toxicity Decoding
• Authors: Maria Mihaela Trusca, Liesbeth Allein,
• Abstract summary: This paper aims to simulate how readers perceive content with varying toxicity levels by generating diverse interpretations of out-of-context sentences.<n>By modeling toxicity, we can anticipate misunderstandings and reveal hidden toxic meanings.
• Score: 1.4963011898406866
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Interpretations of a single sentence can vary, particularly when its context is lost. This paper aims to simulate how readers perceive content with varying toxicity levels by generating diverse interpretations of out-of-context sentences. By modeling toxicity, we can anticipate misunderstandings and reveal hidden toxic meanings. Our proposed decoding strategy explicitly controls toxicity in the set of generated interpretations by (i) aligning interpretation toxicity with the input, (ii) relaxing toxicity constraints for more toxic input sentences, and (iii) promoting diversity in toxicity levels within the set of generated interpretations. Experimental results show that our method improves alignment with human-written interpretations in both syntax and semantics while reducing model prediction uncertainty.

Related papers

• Aligned Probing: Relating Toxic Behavior and Model Internals [66.49887503194101]
  We introduce aligned probing, a novel interpretability framework that aligns the behavior of language models (LMs) Using this framework, we examine over 20 OLMo, Llama, and Mistral models, bridging behavioral and internal perspectives for toxicity for the first time. Our results show that LMs strongly encode information about the toxicity level of inputs and subsequent outputs, particularly in lower layers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T17:23:50Z)
• Natural Language Decompositions of Implicit Content Enable Better Text Representations [52.992875653864076]
  We introduce a method for the analysis of text that takes implicitly communicated content explicitly into account.<n>We use a large language model to produce sets of propositions that are inferentially related to the text that has been observed.<n>Our results suggest that modeling the meanings behind observed language, rather than the literal text alone, is a valuable direction for NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T23:45:20Z)
• Toxicity Inspector: A Framework to Evaluate Ground Truth in Toxicity Detection Through Feedback [0.0]
  This paper introduces a toxicity inspector framework that incorporates a human-in-the-loop pipeline. It aims to enhance the reliability of toxicity benchmark datasets by centering the evaluator's values through an iterative feedback cycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-11T11:56:42Z)
• Toxicity in Multilingual Machine Translation at Scale [3.4620477930009472]
  We evaluate and analyze added toxicity when translating a large evaluation dataset (HOLISTICBIAS, over 472k sentences, covering 13 demographic axes) from English into 164 languages. An automatic toxicity evaluation shows that added toxicity across languages varies from 0% to 5%. The output languages with the most added toxicity tend to be low-resource ones, and the demographic axes with the most added toxicity include sexual orientation, gender and sex, and ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T17:26:27Z)
• Toxicity Detection with Generative Prompt-based Inference [3.9741109244650823]
  It is a long-known risk that language models (LMs), once trained on corpus containing undesirable content, have the power to manifest biases and toxicity. In this work, we explore the generative variant of zero-shot prompt-based toxicity detection with comprehensive trials on prompt engineering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-24T22:44:43Z)
• Detoxifying Language Models with a Toxic Corpus [16.7345472998388]
  We propose to use toxic corpus as an additional resource to reduce the toxicity. Our result shows that toxic corpus can indeed help to reduce the toxicity of the language generation process substantially.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-30T18:25:18Z)
• Leashing the Inner Demons: Self-Detoxification for Language Models [13.576289320208511]
  Language models (LMs) can reproduce (or amplify) toxic language seen during training. We analyze the impact of prompts, decoding strategies and training corpora on the output. We propose a simple yet effective method for language models to "detoxify" themselves without an additional large corpus or external discriminator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-06T23:55:12Z)
• Toxicity Detection can be Sensitive to the Conversational Context [64.28043776806213]
  We construct and publicly release a dataset of 10,000 posts with two kinds of toxicity labels. We introduce a new task, context sensitivity estimation, which aims to identify posts whose perceived toxicity changes if the context is also considered.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-19T13:57:26Z)
• Mitigating Biases in Toxic Language Detection through Invariant Rationalization [70.36701068616367]
  biases toward some attributes, including gender, race, and dialect, exist in most training datasets for toxicity detection. We propose to use invariant rationalization (InvRat), a game-theoretic framework consisting of a rationale generator and a predictor, to rule out the spurious correlation of certain syntactic patterns. Our method yields lower false positive rate in both lexical and dialectal attributes than previous debiasing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T08:49:52Z)
• On the Faithfulness Measurements for Model Interpretations [100.2730234575114]
  Post-hoc interpretations aim to uncover how natural language processing (NLP) models make predictions. To tackle these issues, we start with three criteria: the removal-based criterion, the sensitivity of interpretations, and the stability of interpretations. Motivated by the desideratum of these faithfulness notions, we introduce a new class of interpretation methods that adopt techniques from the adversarial domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T09:19:44Z)
• Challenges in Automated Debiasing for Toxic Language Detection [81.04406231100323]
  Biased associations have been a challenge in the development of classifiers for detecting toxic language. We investigate recently introduced debiasing methods for text classification datasets and models, as applied to toxic language detection. Our focus is on lexical (e.g., swear words, slurs, identity mentions) and dialectal markers (specifically African American English)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-29T22:03:17Z)

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.