Rethinking Toxicity Evaluation in Large Language Models: A Multi-Label Perspective

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15007v1
• Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 06:50:33 GMT
• Title: Rethinking Toxicity Evaluation in Large Language Models: A Multi-Label Perspective
• Authors: Zhiqiang Kou, Junyang Chen, Xin-Qiang Cai, Ming-Kun Xie, Biao Liu, Changwei Wang, Lei Feng, Yuheng Jia, Gang Niu, Masashi Sugiyama, Xin Geng,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results across a range of natural language processing tasks.<n>Their potential to generate harmful content has raised serious safety concerns.<n>We introduce three novel multi-label benchmarks for toxicity detection.
• Score: 104.09817371557476
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results across a range of natural language processing tasks, but their potential to generate harmful content has raised serious safety concerns. Current toxicity detectors primarily rely on single-label benchmarks, which cannot adequately capture the inherently ambiguous and multi-dimensional nature of real-world toxic prompts. This limitation results in biased evaluations, including missed toxic detections and false positives, undermining the reliability of existing detectors. Additionally, gathering comprehensive multi-label annotations across fine-grained toxicity categories is prohibitively costly, further hindering effective evaluation and development. To tackle these issues, we introduce three novel multi-label benchmarks for toxicity detection: \textbf{Q-A-MLL}, \textbf{R-A-MLL}, and \textbf{H-X-MLL}, derived from public toxicity datasets and annotated according to a detailed 15-category taxonomy. We further provide a theoretical proof that, on our released datasets, training with pseudo-labels yields better performance than directly learning from single-label supervision. In addition, we develop a pseudo-label-based toxicity detection method. Extensive experimental results show that our approach significantly surpasses advanced baselines, including GPT-4o and DeepSeek, thus enabling more accurate and reliable evaluation of multi-label toxicity in LLM-generated content.

Related papers

• Do Prompts Guarantee Safety? Mitigating Toxicity from LLM Generations through Subspace Intervention [6.808534332444413]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful text generators.<n>LLMs can produce toxic or harmful content even when given seemingly harmless prompts.<n>This presents a serious safety challenge and can cause real-world harm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T11:33:17Z)
• Unveiling Covert Toxicity in Multimodal Data via Toxicity Association Graphs: A Graph-Based Metric and Interpretable Detection Framework [58.01529356381494]
  We propose a novel detection framework based on Toxicity Association Graphs (TAGs)<n>We introduce the first quantifiable metric for hidden toxicity, the Multimodal Toxicity Covertness (MTC)<n>Our approach enables precise identification of covert toxicity while preserving full interpretability of the decision-making process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T08:54:25Z)
• Projecting Out the Malice: A Global Subspace Approach to LLM Detoxification [73.77171973106567]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit exceptional performance but pose inherent risks of generating toxic content.<n>Traditional methods fail to eliminate underlying toxic regions in parameters, leaving models vulnerable to adversarial attacks.<n>We propose GLOSS, a lightweight method that mitigates toxicity by identifying and eliminating this global subspace from FFN parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-09T09:34:53Z)
• Detoxifying Large Language Models via Autoregressive Reward Guided Representation Editing [77.75609817898035]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance across various tasks, yet they remain vulnerable to generating toxic content.<n>We propose textscAutoregressive textscReward textscGuided textscRe presentation textscEditing (ARGRE)<n>ARGRE explicitly models toxicity transitions within the latent representation space, enabling stable and precise reward-guided editing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T03:40:32Z)
• MDIT-Bench: Evaluating the Dual-Implicit Toxicity in Large Multimodal Models [16.3469883819979]
  We introduce a subtler type of toxicity named dual-implicit toxicity and a novel toxicity benchmark termed MDIT-Bench: Multimodal Dual-Implicit Toxicity Benchmark.<n>MDIT-Bench is a benchmark for evaluating the sensitivity of models to dual-implicit toxicity, with 317,638 questions covering 12 categories, 23 subcategories, and 780 topics.<n>In the experiment, we conducted MDIT-Bench on 13 prominent LMMs, and the results show that these LMMs cannot handle dual-implicit toxicity effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T07:30:01Z)
• ShieldVLM: Safeguarding the Multimodal Implicit Toxicity via Deliberative Reasoning with LVLMs [72.8646625127485]
  Multimodal implicit toxicity appears not only as formal statements in social platforms but also prompts that can lead to toxic dialogs.<n>Despite the success in unimodal text or image moderation, toxicity detection for multimodal content, particularly the multimodal implicit toxicity, remains underexplored.<n>To advance the detection of multimodal implicit toxicity, we build ShieldVLM, a model which identifies implicit toxicity in multimodal statements, prompts and dialogs via deliberative cross-modal reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T07:31:17Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Toxicity in Image-Text Pretraining Datasets: A Case Study on LLaVA [0.0]
  This dataset removes 7,531 of toxic image-text pairs in the LLaVA pre-training dataset.<n>We offer guidelines for implementing robust toxicity detection pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-09T18:01:50Z)
• Aligned Probing: Relating Toxic Behavior and Model Internals [78.20380492883022]
  We introduce aligned probing, a novel interpretability framework that aligns the behavior of language models (LMs)<n>Using this framework, we examine over 20 OLMo, Llama, and Mistral models, bridging behavioral and internal perspectives for toxicity for the first time.<n>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)
• How Toxic Can You Get? Search-based Toxicity Testing for Large Language Models [0.5597620745943381]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can cause extensive harm when prone to generating toxic responses.<n>We present EvoTox, an automated testing framework for LLMs' inclination to toxicity.<n>We conduct a quantitative and qualitative empirical evaluation using four state-of-the-art LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-03T10:08:49Z)
• Can LLMs Recognize Toxicity? A Structured Investigation Framework and Toxicity Metric [16.423707276483178]
  We introduce a robust metric grounded on Large Language Models (LLMs) to flexibly measure toxicity according to the given definition. Our results demonstrate outstanding performance in measuring toxicity within verified factors, improving on conventional metrics by 12 points in the F1 score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-10T07:55:27Z)
• Unveiling the Implicit Toxicity in Large Language Models [77.90933074675543]
  The open-endedness of large language models (LLMs) combined with their impressive capabilities may lead to new safety issues when being exploited for malicious use. We show that LLMs can generate diverse implicit toxic outputs that are exceptionally difficult to detect via simply zero-shot prompting. We propose a reinforcement learning (RL) based attacking method to further induce the implicit toxicity in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T06:42:36Z)
• 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)
• RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Models [93.151822563361]
  Pretrained neural language models (LMs) are prone to generating racist, sexist, or otherwise toxic language which hinders their safe deployment. We investigate the extent to which pretrained LMs can be prompted to generate toxic language, and the effectiveness of controllable text generation algorithms at preventing such toxic degeneration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-24T03:17:19Z)

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.