nlparxiv

Harm Is Behavioural, Moderation Is Lexical: How Language and Culture Decide Whom Automated Safety Systems Protect and Whom They Silence

Content warning: this paper quotes slurs and hateful statements from published test suites; the racial slur among them is masked. Automated systems decide at scale which messages are harmful, and…

Gabriel Lars Sabadin / Dr Nicola Harding / Sarah Kingston

用途
原典で確認
難易度の目安
Hard
実装コストの目安
Low

概要

Content warning: this paper quotes slurs and hateful statements from published test suites; the racial slur among them is masked. Automated systems decide at scale which messages are harmful, and they decide unevenly. Classifiers label African American English as offensive up to twice as often as other English, the accounts of prominent drag queens can score as more toxic than those of white nationalists, and safety behaviour that holds in English collapses in low-resource languages. We argue that over-flagging and under-protection share one cause: deciding harm from vocabulary and surface form rather than from what a message does. We organise the evidence into seven failure modes and argue, as testable hypotheses, that harmful behaviours (a request for secrecy, a demand for payment, an attempt to isolate someone) travel across languages better than the words that express them. We propose an evaluation protocol that makes the gap between the best- and worst-served language communities a headline result, and show that the naive gap is inflated under equal service and that its usual bootstrap interval is unreliable. Applied to five open systems in eleven languages, from a keyword lexicon to two current multilingual guard models, the protocol finds that none reaches native-speaker accuracy at separating harmful function from harmless form (51 of 55 system-language pairs fall short); that greater capability raises discrimination in nine languages while leaving Arabic and romanised Hindi near chance, so the gap between the best- and worst-served languages grows with capability; that one system both over-flags and under-protects the same language most; and that a language a system reads worst can look the most fairly treated when only false positives are reported.

参考リンク

リンク先のライセンス・再現性・データ条件をご確認ください。自動分類や実装の目安は保証ではありません。

実装を始めるプロンプト

参考リンクを確認したうえで、次の内容をコピーして利用できます。

# 論文・記事
Harm Is Behavioural, Moderation Is Lexical: How Language and Culture Decide Whom Automated Safety Systems Protect and Whom They Silence

# 概要
Content warning: this paper quotes slurs and hateful statements from published test suites; the racial slur among them is masked. Automated systems decide at scale which messages are harmful, and…

# 原典
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.31047

上記の手法を実装してください。実行前に依存関係とライセンスを確認してください。

関連する記事

arxiv実装リンクあり

SCARL: Sequence Confidence-Aligned Reinforcement Learning

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) improves language-model reasoning by scoring sampled responses with a rule-based verifier and reinforcing those that pass. Where a classifier's…

nlp