Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Detecting and Correcting Hate Speech in Multimodal Memes with Large Visual Language Model

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 2311.06737 v1 pith:DBFVMFMM submitted 2023-11-12 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords languagehatefullargemodelstasksvlmscorrectingdetecting
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recently, large language models (LLMs) have taken the spotlight in natural language processing. Further, integrating LLMs with vision enables the users to explore more emergent abilities in multimodality. Visual language models (VLMs), such as LLaVA, Flamingo, or GPT-4, have demonstrated impressive performance on various visio-linguistic tasks. Consequently, there are enormous applications of large models that could be potentially used on social media platforms. Despite that, there is a lack of related work on detecting or correcting hateful memes with VLMs. In this work, we study the ability of VLMs on hateful meme detection and hateful meme correction tasks with zero-shot prompting. From our empirical experiments, we show the effectiveness of the pretrained LLaVA model and discuss its strengths and weaknesses in these tasks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. SocialDF: Benchmark Dataset and Detection Model for Mitigating Harmful Deepfake Content on Social Media Platforms

    cs.LG 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A benchmark of 2,126 Instagram videos labeled real or deepfake by uploader disclosure, evaluated with an LLM fact-checking pipeline that reaches 90.4% accuracy but conflates authenticity with factualness.

  2. LLM Harms: A Taxonomy and Discussion

    cs.CY 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    This paper proposes a taxonomy of LLM harms in five categories and suggests mitigation strategies plus a dynamic auditing system for responsible development.

Pith tools