mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ToxCCIn: Toxic Content Classification with Interpretability

arXiv 2103.01328 ↗First posted 1 Mar 2021cs.CLcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Despite the recent successes of transformer-based models in terms of effectiveness on a variety of tasks, their decisions often remain opaque to humans. Explanations are particularly important for tasks like offensive language or toxicity detection on social media because a manual appeal process is often in place to dispute automatically flagged content. In this work, we propose a technique to improve the interpretability of these models, based on a simple and powerful assumption: a post is at least as toxic as its most toxic span. We incorporate this assumption into transformer models by scoring a post based on the maximum toxicity of its spans and augmenting the training process to identify correct spans. We find this approach effective and can produce explanations that exceed the quality of those provided by Logistic Regression analysis (often regarded as a highly-interpretable model), according to a human study.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Mar 2021.

Builds on

25 of 47 references.

References · 25

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2020Don't Stop Pretraining: Adapt Language Models to Domains and Taskscited by 1,548
  5. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
  6. 2020A Primer in BERTology: What we know about how BERT workscited by 807
  7. 2017Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Languagecited by 724
  8. 2014Distributed Representations of Sentences and Documentscited by 677
  9. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
  10. 2020HateXplain: A Benchmark Dataset for Explainable Hate Speech Detectioncited by 403
  11. 2019Nuanced Metrics for Measuring Unintended Bias with Real Data for Text Classificationcited by 396
  12. 2018Analysis Methods in Neural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 276
13 more
  1. 2019Predicting the Type and Target of Offensive Posts in Social Mediacited by 268
  2. 2017Why We Need New Evaluation Metrics for NLGcited by 232
  3. 2016Ex Machina: Personal Attacks Seen at Scalecited by 208
  4. 2019SemEval-2019 Task 6: Identifying and Categorizing Offensive Language in Social Media (OffensEval)cited by 206
  5. 2017Deep Learning for Hate Speech Detection in Tweetscited by 180
  6. 2020SemEval-2020 Task 12: Multilingual Offensive Language Identification in Social Media (OffensEval 2020)cited by 138
  7. 2019Fine-Grained Analysis of Propaganda in News Articlescited by 130
  8. 2017Understanding Abuse: A Typology of Abusive Language Detection Subtaskscited by 115
  9. 2020Demoting Racial Bias in Hate Speech Detectioncited by 62
  10. 2016Rationale-Augmented Convolutional Neural Networks for Text Classificationcited by 39
  11. 2020A Human Evaluation of AMR-to-English Generation Systemscited by 13
  12. 2020UHH-LT at SemEval-2020 Task 12: Fine-Tuning of Pre-Trained Transformer Networks for Offensive Language Detectioncited by 9
  13. 2020GUIR at SemEval-2020 Task 12: Domain-Tuned Contextualized Models for Offensive Language Detectioncited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 0; 2024: 3; 2025: 4.

10 papers.