HateCOT: An Explanation-Enhanced Dataset for Generalizable Offensive Speech Detection via Large Language Models

Overview

• This paper introduces HateCOT, a new dataset for detecting offensive speech that includes explanations from annotators on why they labeled content as offensive or not.
• The researchers used this dataset to train large language models to not only detect offensive content, but also generate explanations for their predictions.
• The goal is to create models that are more generalizable and transparent in their offensive speech detection, rather than relying on black-box models.

Plain English Explanation

The researchers behind this paper recognized that current approaches to detecting offensive speech online often rely on machine learning models that can be like "black boxes" - they make predictions, but it's not always clear how they arrived at those conclusions. This can make it difficult to understand why certain content was flagged as offensive, or to have confidence that the models will work well across diverse contexts.

To address this, the researchers created a new dataset called HateCOT. When annotators labeled content as offensive or not, they also provided explanations for their decisions. By training large language models on this dataset, the researchers aimed to develop systems that can not only detect offensive speech, but also generate explanations for their predictions.

The key idea is that models that can explain their reasoning will be more transparent and trustworthy. Rather than simply making binary decisions, these models can provide insight into the specific factors they are considering. This could help users better understand content moderation decisions, and also make the models more generalizable to new contexts, rather than being overly specific to the training data.

Overall, the HateCOT dataset and models trained on it represent an effort to make offensive speech detection systems more robust, explainable, and useful for real-world applications.

Technical Explanation

The HateCOT dataset was created by having annotators label online comments as offensive or not, and then provide free-text explanations for their decisions. This resulted in a dataset of over 50,000 annotated comments, along with the corresponding explanations.

The researchers then fine-tuned large language models like BERT and GPT-3 on this HateCOT dataset, training them not just to classify comments as offensive or not, but also to generate explanations for their predictions. This allowed the models to not only make decisions, but also provide insight into their reasoning.

Through experiments, the researchers found that the explanation-enhanced models outperformed standard offensive speech detection models in terms of accuracy, as well as generalization to new datasets. The generated explanations also aligned well with human-provided rationales, suggesting the models were capturing meaningful factors in their decision making.

Importantly, the researchers also examined potential biases in the HateCOT dataset itself, drawing on previous work like Investigating Annotator Bias in Large Language Models for Hate Speech Detection and Exploiting Hatred by Targets: Hate Speech Detection with Victim Robustness. They found that certain demographic and linguistic biases existed, which is an important consideration when deploying these types of systems in the real world.

Critical Analysis

While the HateCOT dataset and explanation-enhanced models represent an important step forward, there are still some limitations and areas for further research. For example, the dataset only covers English-language content, so it's unclear how well the models would generalize to other languages and cultural contexts, as discussed in Exploring Cross-Cultural Differences in English Hate Speech.

Additionally, the researchers note that the generated explanations, while more aligned with human rationales than standard models, still have room for improvement in terms of faithfully capturing the nuanced reasoning behind offensive speech judgments. Approaches like Tox-BART: Leveraging Toxicity Attributes for Explanation Generation could potentially help address this.

Finally, while the researchers made efforts to assess biases in the dataset, it's an ongoing challenge to fully account for and mitigate these issues in real-world content moderation systems, as highlighted in HateTinyLLM: Hate Speech Detection Using Tiny Large Language Models.

Overall, the HateCOT dataset and explanation-enhanced models represent a promising step toward more transparent and generalizable offensive speech detection. However, continued research and careful deployment will be necessary to ensure these systems are fair, effective, and beneficial for online communities.

Conclusion

This paper introduces an important new dataset and modeling approach for detecting and explaining offensive speech online. By training large language models to not only classify content, but also generate explanations for their decisions, the researchers have created a more transparent and generalizable system compared to traditional black-box models.

While there are still some limitations and areas for further research, the HateCOT dataset and explanation-enhanced models demonstrate the value of incorporating explainability into AI-powered content moderation. As these types of systems become more widely deployed, ensuring they are fair, accountable, and beneficial to users will be crucial. This paper represents a significant contribution toward that goal.