mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Cyberbullying Classifiers are Sensitive to Model-Agnostic Perturbations

arXiv 2201.06384 ↗First posted 17 Jan 2022cs.CL cs.CY cs.SIcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A limited amount of studies investigates the role of model-agnostic adversarial behavior in toxic content classification. As toxicity classifiers predominantly rely on lexical cues, (deliberately) creative and evolving language-use can be detrimental to the utility of current corpora and state-of-the-art models when they are deployed for content moderation. The less training data is available, the more vulnerable models might become. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to investigate the effect of adversarial behavior and augmentation for cyberbullying detection. We demonstrate that model-agnostic lexical substitutions significantly hurt classifier performance. Moreover, when these perturbed samples are used for augmentation, we show models become robust against word-level perturbations at a slight trade-off in overall task performance. Augmentations proposed in prior work on toxicity prove to be less effective. Our results underline the need for such evaluations in online harm areas with small corpora. The perturbed data, models, and code are available for reproduction at https://github.com/cmry/augtox

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 97 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jan 2022.

Builds on

43 of 97 references.

References · 43

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  4. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
  5. 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,475
  6. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,255
  7. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
  8. 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 807
  9. 2019Is BERT Really Robust? A Strong Baseline for Natural Language Attack on Text Classification and Entailmentcited by 671
  10. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 419
  11. 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 409
  12. 2018TextBugger: Generating Adversarial Text Against Real-world Applicationscited by 381
31 more
  1. 2020HateBERT: Retraining BERT for Abusive Language Detection in Englishcited by 207
  2. 2021GPT3Mix: Leveraging Large-scale Language Models for Text Augmentationcited by 187
  3. 2019Not Enough Data? Deep Learning to the Rescue!cited by 175
  4. 2020Data Augmentation using Pre-trained Transformer Modelscited by 168
  5. 2020Directions in Abusive Language Training Data: Garbage In, Garbage Outcited by 140
  6. 2021A Survey on Data Augmentation for Text Classificationcited by 111
  7. 2017Deceiving Google's Perspective API Built for Detecting Toxic Commentscited by 102
  8. 2019Text Processing Like Humans Do: Visually Attacking and Shielding NLP Systemscited by 101
  9. 2021Challenges in Automated Debiasing for Toxic Language Detectioncited by 96
  10. 2019Tagged Back-Translationcited by 77
  11. 2020SOLID: A Large-Scale Semi-Supervised Dataset for Offensive Language Identificationcited by 53
  12. 2017A4NT: Author Attribute Anonymity by Adversarial Training of Neural Machine Translationcited by 42
  13. 2016Representation of linguistic form and function in recurrent neural networkscited by 39
  14. 2020Better Robustness by More Coverage: Adversarial Training with Mixup Augmentation for Robust Fine-tuningcited by 39
  15. 2021Improved Text Classification via Contrastive Adversarial Trainingcited by 38
  16. 2019Tackling Online Abuse: A Survey of Automated Abuse Detection Methodscited by 33
  17. 2020Linguistically-Informed Transformations (LIT): A Method for Automatically Generating Contrast Setscited by 31
  18. 2018Automatic Detection of Cyberbullying in Social Media Textcited by 26
  19. 2020Evaluating Models' Local Decision Boundaries via Contrast Setscited by 24
  20. 2019Towards Robust Toxic Content Classificationcited by 22
  21. 2019Data Augmentation for BERT Fine-Tuning in Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 21
  22. 2020On Cross-Dataset Generalization in Automatic Detection of Online Abusecited by 20
  23. 2020Cyberbullying Detection with Fairness Constraintscited by 15
  24. 2021Adversarial Stylometry in the Wild: Transferable Lexical Substitution Attacks on Author Profilingcited by 13
  25. 2021Token-Modification Adversarial Attacks for Natural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 12
  26. 2018Style Obfuscation by Invariancecited by 10
  27. 2019Current Limitations in Cyberbullying Detection: on Evaluation Criteria, Reproducibility, and Data Scarcitycited by 6
  28. 2020Generalisation of Cyberbullying Detectioncited by 4
  29. 2020Adversarial Black-Box Attacks On Text Classifiers Using Multi-Objective Genetic Optimization Guided By Deep Networkscited by 3
  30. 2021Generating Natural Language Adversarial Examples through An Improved Beam Search Algorithmcited by 3
  31. 2021Target Model Agnostic Adversarial Attacks with Query Budgets on Language Understanding Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

5 papers.