SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.27462

Sledgehammer or Scalpel? A Fine-grained Adaptive Framework for Implicit Hate Speech

Abstract

Unlike explicit attacks with obvious profanity, implicit hate speech hides malice within seemingly compliant expressions through metaphors and contextual hints, making its detection in online content review challenging. While existing PLM- or LLM-based methods perform well, they typically apply a single reasoning process to all samples. This overlooks fine-grained linguistic nuances and causes unnecessary computation for simpler cases. We observe that online hate speech is not monolithic but manifests in varied forms. We therefore define three fine-grained categories: Shallow, Targeted, and Context-Dependent. Accordingly, we propose Fine-grained Adaptive Implicit Hate speech Detection (FAID), a novel framework that first performs fine-grained classification and then adapts to specific categories. Specifically, for Shallow samples with surface-identifiable intents, the framework adopts lightweight prompt-tuning for rapid classification; for Targeted comments that bind malicious intent to concealed targets, we design knowledge augmentation to iteratively refine the model and reveal hidden targets; for Context-Dependent comments lacking background information, we utilize an agentic framework that automatically generates prompts to evolve context, infer missing background information and identify ambiguous malicious intents. This adaptive architecture focuses computational resources on complex implicit samples while avoiding redundant reasoning for shallow samples. Experiments on four benchmark datasets demonstrate that FAID significantly outperforms SOTA baselines.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Han Wang, Yuhu Cheng, Xuesong Wang, Yi Zhu. 2026-07-10. Sledgehammer or Scalpel? A Fine-grained Adaptive Framework for Implicit Hate Speech. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27462

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.

cs.CL