Automated Identification of Toxic Code Reviews Using ToxiCR
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Toxic conversations during software development interactions may have serious repercussions on a Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) development project. For example, victims of toxic conversations may become afraid to express themselves, therefore get demotivated, and may eventually leave the project. Automated filtering of toxic conversations may help a FOSS community to maintain healthy interactions among its members. However, off-the-shelf toxicity detectors perform poorly on Software Engineering (SE) datasets, such as one curated from code review comments. To encounter this challenge, we present ToxiCR, a supervised learning-based toxicity identification tool for code review interactions. ToxiCR includes a choice to select one of the ten supervised learning algorithms, an option to select text vectorization techniques, eight preprocessing steps, and a large-scale labeled dataset of 19,571 code review comments. Two out of those eight preprocessing steps are SE domain specific. With our rigorous evaluation of the models with various combinations of preprocessing steps and vectorization techniques, we have identified the best combination for our dataset that boosts 95.8% accuracy and 88.9% F1 score. ToxiCR significantly outperforms existing toxicity detectors on our dataset. We have released our dataset, pre-trained models, evaluation results, and source code publicly available at: https://github.com/WSU-SEAL/ToxiCR
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 109 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Feb 2022.
Builds on
32 of 109 references.
References · 32
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
- 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,293
- 2016Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Informationcited by 1,578
- 2015Aligning Books and Movies: Towards Story-like Visual Explanations by Watching Movies and Reading Bookscited by 1,041
- 2015Bidirectional LSTM-CRF Models for Sequence Taggingcited by 544
- 2020SemEval-2020 Task 12: Multilingual Offensive Language Identification in Social Media (OffensEval 2020)cited by 138
- 2017HDLTex: Hierarchical Deep Learning for Text Classificationcited by 105
20 more
- 2013A Computational Approach to Politeness with Application to Social Factorscited by 104
- 2017Deceiving Google's Perspective API Built for Detecting Toxic Commentscited by 99
- 2018Conversations Gone Awry: Detecting Early Signs of Conversational Failurecited by 73
- 2019DocBERT: BERT for Document Classificationcited by 68
- 2021Designing Toxic Content Classification for a Diversity of Perspectivescited by 63
- 2020Demoting Racial Bias in Hate Speech Detectioncited by 62
- 2018Challenges for Toxic Comment Classification: An In-Depth Error Analysiscited by 55
- 2018Deep Gated Recurrent and Convolutional Network Hybrid Model for Univariate Time Series Classificationcited by 26
- 2019Towards Robust Toxic Content Classificationcited by 22
- 2018Convolutional Neural Networks for Toxic Comment Classificationcited by 21
- 2018A Benchmark Study on Sentiment Analysis for Software Engineering Researchcited by 14
- 2018Neural Character-based Composition Models for Abuse Detectioncited by 11
- 2016Modelling Radiological Language with Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Networkscited by 9
- 2017EmoTxt: A Toolkit for Emotion Recognition from Textcited by 9
- 2017Bug or Not? Bug Report Classification Using N-Gram IDFcited by 4
- 2020A Benchmark Study of the Contemporary Toxicity Detectors on Software Engineering Interactionscited by 4
- 2018Expressions of Sentiments During Code Reviews: Male vs. Femalecited by 3
- 2021The "Shut the f**k up" Phenomenon: Characterizing Incivility in Open Source Code Review Discussionscited by 3
- 2018Understanding the Motivations, Challenges and Needs of Blockchain Software Developers: A Surveycited by 2
- 2018Stop Illegal Comments: A Multi-Task Deep Learning Approachcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 2; 2026: 3.
8 papers.
- 2024Software Vulnerability and Functionality Assessment using LLMscited by 11
- 2024CRScore: Grounding Automated Evaluation of Code Review Comments in Code Claims and Smellscited by 8
- 2025Combating Toxic Language: A Review of LLM-Based Strategies for Software Engineeringcited by 1
- 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Reviewcited by 1
- 2023On the Challenges of Building Datasets for Hate Speech Detectioncited by 0
- 2025Web(er) of Hate: A Survey on How Hate Speech Is Typedcited by 0
- 2026Machine Learning Models for the Early Detection of Burnout in Software Engineering: a Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 0
- 2026From Specialization to Generalization: Instruction-tuned LLMs for Robust Harmful Content Mitigationcited by 0
- 2026From Specialization to Generalization: Instruction-tuned LLMs for Robust Harmful Content Mitigation26 Aug 2026
- 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Review17 May 2026
- 2026Machine Learning Models for the Early Detection of Burnout in Software Engineering: a Systematic Literature Review24 Mar 2026
- 2025Web(er) of Hate: A Survey on How Hate Speech Is Typed19 Jun 2025
- 2025Combating Toxic Language: A Review of LLM-Based Strategies for Software Engineering21 Apr 2025
- 2024CRScore: Grounding Automated Evaluation of Code Review Comments in Code Claims and Smells29 Sep 2024
- 2024Software Vulnerability and Functionality Assessment using LLMs13 Mar 2024
- 2023On the Challenges of Building Datasets for Hate Speech Detection6 Sep 2023