ToxiLab: How Well Do Open-Source LLMs Generate Synthetic Toxicity Data?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Effective toxic content detection relies heavily on high-quality and diverse data, which serve as the foundation for robust content moderation models. Synthetic data has become a common approach for training models across various NLP tasks. However, its effectiveness remains uncertain for highly subjective tasks like hate speech detection, with previous research yielding mixed results. This study explores the potential of open-source LLMs for harmful data synthesis, utilizing controlled prompting and supervised fine-tuning techniques to enhance data quality and diversity. We systematically evaluated 6 open source LLMs on 5 datasets, assessing their ability to generate diverse, high-quality harmful data while minimizing hallucination and duplication. Our results show that Mistral consistently outperforms other open models, and supervised fine-tuning significantly enhances data reliability and diversity. We further analyze the trade-offs between prompt-based vs. fine-tuned toxic data synthesis, discuss real-world deployment challenges, and highlight ethical considerations. Our findings demonstrate that fine-tuned open source LLMs provide scalable and cost-effective solutions to augment toxic content detection datasets, paving the way for more accessible and transparent content moderation tools.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Nov 2024.
Builds on
15 of 28 references.
References · 15
- 2024LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Modelscited by 1,464
- 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,154
- 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,045
- 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 807
- 2022ToxiGen: A Large-Scale Machine-Generated Dataset for Adversarial and Implicit Hate Speech Detectioncited by 422
- 2023Large Language Model as Attributed Training Data Generator: A Tale of Diversity and Biascited by 232
- 2022ZeroGen: Efficient Zero-shot Learning via Dataset Generationcited by 211
- 2022Generating Training Data with Language Models: Towards Zero-Shot Language Understandingcited by 199
- 2017Data Augmentation for Low-Resource Neural Machine Translationcited by 139
- 2022ProGen: Progressive Zero-shot Dataset Generation via In-context Feedbackcited by 67
- 2020Deep Learning Models for Multilingual Hate Speech Detectioncited by 49
- 2024Data Augmentation using Large Language Models: Data Perspectives, Learning Paradigms and Challengescited by 30
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.
5 papers.
- 2025TRIDENT: Benchmarking LLM Safety in Finance, Medicine, and Lawcited by 8
- 2026ToxiGAN: Toxic Data Augmentation via LLM-Guided Directional Adversarial Generationcited by 1
- 2026Beyond Static Benchmarks: Synthesizing Harmful Content via Persona-based Simulation for Robust Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026Where Does Toxicity Live? Mechanistic Localization and Targeted Suppression in Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Lower-Resource, Higher Scores: Language Bias in LLM Evaluatorscited by 0
- 2026Lower-Resource, Higher Scores: Language Bias in LLM Evaluators16 Jul 2026
- 2026Where Does Toxicity Live? Mechanistic Localization and Targeted Suppression in Language Models27 May 2026
- 2026Beyond Static Benchmarks: Synthesizing Harmful Content via Persona-based Simulation for Robust Evaluation18 Apr 2026
- 2026ToxiGAN: Toxic Data Augmentation via LLM-Guided Directional Adversarial Generation6 Jan 2026
- 2025TRIDENT: Benchmarking LLM Safety in Finance, Medicine, and Law22 Jul 2025