Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

Adapting Large Language Models for Content Moderation: Pitfalls in Data Engineering and Supervised Fine-tuning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2310.03400 v2 pith:QG64XKDK submitted 2023-10-05 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords modelscontentfine-tuningmodeldatamoderationdeployedllms
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Nowadays, billions of people engage in communication and express their opinions on the internet daily. Unfortunately, not all of these expressions are friendly or compliant, making content moderation an indispensable task. A common approach is to use a discriminative model to classify the content, but this method often requires strict data engineering, otherwise it will face unacceptable overfitting. With the successful development of Large Language Models (LLMs) in recent years, LLM-based methods have become a feasible solution for handling tasks in various domains. Thanks to the knowledge of the foundation models, we can develop more robust privately deployed models with limited data via fine-tuning these foundation models. Moreover, as a generative model, it can provide detailed analysis of the review process, enhancing interpretability. In this paper, we introduce how to fine-tune a LLM model that can be privately deployed for content moderation. Specifically, we discuss the differences between discriminative and generative models using content moderation as an example. Additionally, we reveal that incorporating reasoning processes during the fine-tuning of LLMs can effectively alleviate overfitting, even if the model is not allowed to directly output reasoning processes during deployment. We present a complete process, from data collection and construction to model training and overfitting elimination, for fine-tuning LLMs in vertical domain deployments. We report the entire research process and the key findings in this paper, hoping to provide valuable experience for researchers who are fine-tuning privately deployed models in their domain-specific research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Lost in Pronunciation: Detecting Chinese Offensive Language Disguised by Phonetic Cloaking Replacement

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new 500-post benchmark of naturally occurring phonetic cloaking shows LLMs detect such Chinese offensive language with F1 at most 0.672, and Pinyin-augmented prompting partially repairs the gap.

  2. ChineseHarm-Bench: A Chinese Harmful Content Detection Benchmark

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ChineseHarm-Bench is a six-category, 6,000-sample Chinese harmful content detection benchmark with a human-annotated knowledge rule base, and a knowledge-augmented fine-tuning baseline that brings small models to near...

  3. Embedding-based Retrieval in Multimodal Content Moderation

    cs.IR 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Similarity-based retrieval with contrastively trained embeddings catches emerging harmful video trends far better than a fixed classifier, according to the paper's production experiments.

  4. Filter-And-Refine: A MLLM Based Cascade System for Industrial-Scale Video Content Moderation

    cs.LG 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A cascade of an embedding router and a fine-tuned multimodal LLM ranker is claimed to improve content moderation F1 by 66.5% while using 1.5% of the compute of direct LLM deployment.

  5. Guardians and Offenders: A Survey on Harmful Content Generation and Safety Mitigation of LLM

    cs.CL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    The submission's abstract promises an LLM safety survey, but the provided body is the opening page of an unrelated arithmetic-dynamics paper, so the artifact is internally inconsistent.

  6. Bridging the Safety Gap: A Guardrail Pipeline for Trustworthy LLM Inferences

    cs.AI 2025-02 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A guardrail pipeline combining detection, retrieval grounding, rule-based wrappers, and a repair model is reported to match OpenAI moderation and fix 80.7 percent of hallucinated HaluEval answers.

Pith tools