# Beyond Plain Toxic: Detection of Inappropriate Statements on Flammable Topics for the Russian Language

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.02392 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02392/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 24 of its 53 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 4 Mar 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02116/) (2019)
- [Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.04606/) (2016)
- [Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.04009/) (2017)
- [Predicting the Type and Target of Offensive Posts in Social Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.09666/) (2019)
- [Hate Speech Dataset from a White Supremacy Forum](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.04444/) (2018)
- [Build it Break it Fix it for Dialogue Safety: Robustness from Adversarial Human Attack](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.06083/) (2019)
- [Recipes for Safety in Open-domain Chatbots](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.07079/) (2020)
- [Reducing Gender Bias in Abusive Language Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07231/) (2018)
- [Multilingual and Multi-Aspect Hate Speech Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.11049/) (2019)
- [A Benchmark Dataset for Learning to Intervene in Online Hate Speech](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.04251/) (2019)
- [Utilizing BERT for Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis via Constructing Auxiliary Sentence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.09588/) (2019)
- [Understanding Abuse: A Typology of Abusive Language Detection Subtasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.09899/) (2017)
- [CONAN -- COunter NArratives through Nichesourcing: a Multilingual Dataset of Responses to Fight Online Hate Speech](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.03270/) (2019)
- [Adaptation of Deep Bidirectional Multilingual Transformers for Russian Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07213/) (2019)
- [Conditional BERT Contextual Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.06705/) (2018)
- [Toxicity Detection: Does Context Really Matter?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.00998/) (2020)
- [Anticipating Safety Issues in E2E Conversational AI: Framework and Tooling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03451/) (2021)
- [Demoting Racial Bias in Hate Speech Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.12246/) (2020)
- [SOLID: A Large-Scale Semi-Supervised Dataset for Offensive Language Identification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14454/) (2020)
- [Demographics Should Not Be the Reason of Toxicity: Mitigating Discrimination in Text Classifications with Instance Weighting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14088/) (2020)
- [CG-BERT: Conditional Text Generation with BERT for Generalized Few-shot Intent Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.01881/) (2020)
- [Something's Brewing! Early Prediction of Controversy-causing Posts from Discussion Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.07372/) (2019)
- [Detecting Inappropriate Messages on Sensitive Topics that Could Harm a Company's Reputation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.05345/) (2021)
- [WAC: A Corpus of Wikipedia Conversations for Online Abuse Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.06190/) (2020)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [A Taxonomy of Rater Disagreements: Surveying Challenges & Opportunities from the Perspective of Annotating Online Toxicity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04345/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Toxicity on the Internet, such as hate speech, offenses towards particular users or groups of people, or the use of obscene words, is an acknowledged problem. However, there also exist other types of inappropriate messages which are usually not viewed as toxic, e.g. as they do not contain explicit offences. Such messages can contain covered toxicity or generalizations, incite harmful actions (crime, suicide, drug use), provoke "heated" discussions. Such messages are often related to particular sensitive topics, e.g. on politics, sexual minorities, social injustice which more often than other topics, e.g. cars or computing, yield toxic emotional reactions. At the same time, clearly not all messages within such flammable topics are inappropriate. Towards this end, in this work, we present two text collections labelled according to binary notion of inapropriateness and a multinomial notion of sensitive topic. Assuming that the notion of inappropriateness is common among people of the same culture, we base our approach on human intuitive understanding of what is not acceptable and harmful. To objectivise the notion of inappropriateness, we define it in a data-driven way though crowdsourcing. Namely we run a large-scale annotation study asking workers if a given chatbot textual statement could harm reputation of a company created it. Acceptably high values of inter-annotator agreement suggest that the notion of inappropriateness exists and can be uniformly understood by different people. To define the notion of sensitive topics in an objective way we use on guidelines suggested commonly by specialists of legal and PR department of a large public company as potentially harmful.