Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

The First Multilingual Model For The Detection of Suicide Texts

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a single multilingual transformer fine-tuned on machine-translated Spanish tweets can detect suicidal text in six languages, with mT5 outperforming mBERT and XLM-RoBERTa in every language.

desk verdict A useful translated dataset and model comparison, but the central claim hinges on an undescribed self-cited test set that may share the training pipeline. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15498 v1 pith:QHPZ23IS submitted 2024-12-20 cs.CL cs.AI

Rodolfo Zevallos , Annika Schoene , John E. Ortega This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords multilingualsuicidedetectionsuicidalideationmachinetranslationcross-lingualtransfermT5BERTXLM-RoBERTasocialmediaNLP
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a single multilingual transformer can detect suicidal text in six languages — Spanish, English, German, Catalan, Portuguese, and Italian — when fine-tuned on a Spanish Twitter corpus machine-translated into those languages. The authors compare mBERT, XLM-RoBERTa, and mT5, and report that mT5 is best in every language, with F1 scores from 83.2 to 88.1, which they summarize as above 85%. The point of the work is that machine translation plus a multilingual model can substitute for expensive per-language annotation, making automated suicide-risk screening more accessible to non-English-speaking online communities. If the claim holds, it would mean that low-resource languages can inherit a suicide-detection capability from a single labeled source dataset, with translation quality as the main cost.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the combination of SeamlessM4T, a multilingual translation model, and three pretrained transformers — mBERT (multilingual BERT), XLM-RoBERTa, and mT5, a text-to-text transformer. Training data are the 2,068 Spanish tweets from Valeriano et al. (2020), translated into English, Catalan, German, Italian, and Portuguese; each model is fine-tuned on the multilingual set and evaluated on the Lexicography Saves Lives (LSL) test set. Translation quality is measured by perplexity under monolingual language models, and robustness is checked with 10-fold cross-validation. The load-bearing piece is the translated corpus: it is what lets one labeled dataset stand in for six languages.

What would settle it

If the LSL test set contains any of the same tweets, or machine-translated versions of them, used to fine-tune the models, or if its labels were created by the same annotation process as the training data, then the reported F1 scores do not establish detection of suicidal text in genuinely new posts; a reader can check by computing tweet overlaps and by testing mT5 on freshly annotated native-language tweets in the six languages.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, as the authors state it, is that mT5 outperforms mBERT and XLM-RoBERTa on suicide-text classification in all six languages, with the largest gains over the BERT-style baselines appearing consistently across languages rather than only in the source language. English and Spanish score highest, Italian and Portuguese lowest, and the ordering of the three models is stable from language to language, which the authors read as evidence that each model's strengths transfer independent of linguistic particulars. The paper also reports translation-quality scores via perplexity, finding English and Portuguese translations most fluent and German and Italian least, and concludes that a multilingual model fine-tuned on translated Spanish tweets is a viable path to broad linguistic coverage in suicide-risk detection.

Load-bearing premise

The reported six-language results stand on the LSL test set, and the paper provides no information about how that test set was built, labeled, or whether it is independent of the translated training tweets; if the test set is not independent or is mislabeled, the F1 scores do not show cross-lingual generalization.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • mT5 should be the default choice among the three tested models for multilingual suicide-text detection, since it leads every language and every metric.
  • Machine translation of a single annotated dataset can create usable training data for languages that lack native suicide-ideation corpora.
  • English and Spanish performance suggests the approach is strongest for languages close to the source; Italian and Portuguese likely need additional native data or better translations.
  • Perplexity scores identify German and Italian as the weakest translation links, so translation quality is the likely ceiling on detection in those languages.
  • Fine-tuned multilingual transformers can transfer a sensitive classification task like suicide risk across languages without per-language annotation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the translated corpus is only six languages, but the same recipe — source corpus plus SeamlessM4T plus mT5 — could be pressed into service for any language SeamlessM4T supports, so the paper's method, if sound, is a template rather than a finished product.
  • Editorial inference: because all non-Spanish training data are machine translations, the models may be learning translationese — stylistic artifacts of the translation engine — rather than natural suicidal phrasing in each language; testing on human-written native tweets is the way to find out.
  • Editorial inference: a practical deployment would need per-language confidence thresholds and a human-in-the-loop protocol, since equal F1 scores can hide different error patterns across languages and false positives carry real clinical cost.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a multilingual approach to detecting suicidal text on social media. The authors use a Spanish corpus of 2,068 tweets (498 positive, 1,570 negative) from Valeriano et al. (2020), machine-translate it into English, Catalan, German, Italian, and Portuguese using SeamlessM4T, and then fine-tune mBERT, XLM-R (referred to as XML-R), and mT5 on this multilingual data. They report that mT5 performs best, with F1 scores 'above 85%' in the abstract, and they include a perplexity-based analysis of translation quality. The evaluation is carried out on a test set called Lexicography Saves Lives (LSL), cited to Schoene et al. (2025), which is not described in the paper. The paper also includes a 10-fold cross-validation experiment on the training data and discusses limitations and ethical considerations.

Significance. If the central claim is verifiable, the work would be a useful step toward multilingual suicide risk detection in low-resource languages, and the idea of augmenting training data via machine translation is a pragmatic and transferable approach. The comparison of three strong multilingual transformer baselines with documented hyperparameters is a reasonable contribution to the applied NLP literature. However, the evaluation currently rests on an undescribed test set from the same research group, and the reported headline numbers are not fully consistent with the results table. These issues must be resolved before the contribution can be assessed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1] The test set 'Lexicography Saves Lives (LSL)' is introduced with only a citation to Schoene et al. (2025) and no description of its size, source, labeling procedure, or language composition. Because the paper's central claim is cross-lingual generalization to natural suicidal text in six languages, the evaluation must be based on an independent, well-characterized test set. If LSL was created by translating the same Spanish corpus, or by using the same SeamlessM4T pipeline as the training data, then the reported F1 scores would measure performance on translationese from the training distribution rather than generalization to genuine target-language text. The authors must provide a full description of LSL, including its construction, statistics per language, and how independence from the training data is ensured. Ideally, the authors should also evaluate on an additional external benchmark in each target language.
  2. [Abstract, Section 4.1, Section 6] The abstract and discussion state that mT5 achieves 'F1 scores above 85%', but Table 2 reports mT5 F1 values of 83.2 for Italian and 84.8 for Portuguese. Section 4.1 also says scores 'surpassing 85% in most cases', which is technically true but the abstract's unqualified claim overstates the results. Please revise the abstract and Sections 4.1 and 6 to reflect the actual observed range, or explicitly qualify which languages are above 85%.
  3. [Section 5, Table 3] The perplexity-based evaluation of translation quality is not internally consistent. Table 3 uses different language models for different target languages (roberta-large for English, xlm-roberta-xl for the others), so the perplexity values are not comparable across languages. Furthermore, perplexity is at best a fluency measure and does not capture semantic fidelity of suicide-related content, which is the critical property for this task. The abstract's statement that 'English and Spanish translations also displayed high quality based on perplexity' is also unsupported: Spanish is the source language and no Spanish perplexity is reported. Please provide a uniform, task-appropriate evaluation or substantially temper the claims about translation quality.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 8] The Ethical Considerations section ends mid-sentence with 'Finally,' and is incomplete. This should be finished or removed before publication.
  2. [Section 3.3] The text says the experiments 'enlisted the capabilities of four cutting-edge language models' but only three models are evaluated. The typo should be corrected.
  3. [Throughout] The model name 'XML-R' should be 'XLM-R' or 'XLM-RoBERTa' consistently, and 'mBERT' is typically written as 'mBERT' or 'multilingual BERT' but should be consistent with the reference.
  4. [Table 2] The paper does not specify whether the F1 scores are macro-averaged, micro-averaged, or class-weighted. Given the class imbalance (24% positive, 76% negative), the averaging method matters for interpreting the results. Please state it.
  5. [Section 2] The claim that 'no research has been found exploring multilingual language models for suicide risk detection' is very strong and difficult to verify; consider softening it to 'to our knowledge' and citing any recent related work.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Headline F1 scores rest on an undescribed self-cited test set (LSL) from the same author group, making the cross-lingual claim unverifiable.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3.1 (Dataset)]
    "Moreover, we used as test set the Lexicography Saves Lives (LSL) Schoene et al. (2025)."

    The only test set behind the headline six-language F1 scores is LSL, cited to Schoene et al. (2025), whose author list includes Schoene, Ortega, and Zevallos, i.e., the present authors. The paper gives no size, source, annotation procedure, or language distribution for LSL, so the evaluation cannot be checked against an independent benchmark. The cited paper's title, 'Automatically translating suicide-related language,' together with the present paper's identical use of SeamlessM4T translations of the Valeriano et al. Spanish corpus, raises the possibility that LSL was produced by the same translation pipeline from the same source corpus.

full rationale

The training and modeling pipeline is not circular in itself: the Spanish source corpus (Valeriano et al., 2020) is external, SeamlessM4T is a third-party translation model, and mBERT, XML-R, and mT5 are standard pretrained transformers. The abstract's 'F1 scores above 85%' overstates Table 2 (Italian 83.2, Portuguese 84.8), but that is a reporting inconsistency, not circularity. The single load-bearing circularity concern is the LSL test set: all six-language results in Table 2 are computed against a resource cited only to the authors' own 2025 paper, with no description of how LSL was built. Since the present paper's method is to machine-translate the same Spanish suicide corpus into the same target languages, and the cited LSL paper is about automatically translating suicide-related language, the independence of the test set is not established. The paper does not rule out that LSL is generated from the same source and pipeline, in which case the reported F1 scores would reduce to classifying translations of training data rather than genuine cross-lingual generalization. This makes the self-citation load-bearing for the paper's main claim, so the circularity score is moderate rather than zero, though no equation-level circularity is demonstrated.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no invented entities. Its central claim rests on three domain assumptions: that machine translation preserves suicide-intent labels across languages, that the LSL test set is valid and independent, and that perplexity is a meaningful proxy for translation fidelity. It also uses per-model hyperparameters tuned on the validation set, which are fitted values. These assumptions are not tested or documented.

free parameters (1)
  • Per-model fine-tuning hyperparameters = mBERT: lr 2e-5, batch 16, dropout 0.3; XML-R: lr 3e-5, batch 16, dropout 0.5; mT5: lr 3e-5, batch 32, dropout 0.5
    Selected via exhaustive search on the validation set (Section 3.3). The comparison is not controlled across models because each model gets different hyperparameters, and the mT5 advantage may partly reflect this tuning.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Machine translation preserves the binary suicide-intent label; a suicidal Spanish tweet remains suicidal when translated into Catalan, English, German, Italian, and Portuguese.
    Section 3.1 uses the translated corpus with the original labels for fine-tuning; if translation alters meaning or label, the multilingual model learns from mislabeled data.
  • domain assumption The LSL test set (Schoene et al., 2025) is a valid, correctly labeled evaluation set for all six languages.
    Section 3.1 uses LSL as test set but gives no details; the reported F1 scores rest entirely on this assumption.
  • domain assumption Perplexity of monolingual language models is a meaningful proxy for translation quality in this sensitive domain.
    Section 5 uses perplexity as the only translation quality metric; low perplexity does not guarantee semantic fidelity for suicide-related content.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The First Multilingual Model For The Detection of Suicide Texts." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QHPZ23IS

@misc{pith2026241215498,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The First Multilingual Model For The Detection of Suicide Texts},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QHPZ23IS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15498}
}
read the original abstract

Suicidal ideation is a serious health problem affecting millions of people worldwide. Social networks provide information about these mental health problems through users' emotional expressions. We propose a multilingual model leveraging transformer architectures like mBERT, XML-R, and mT5 to detect suicidal text across posts in six languages - Spanish, English, German, Catalan, Portuguese and Italian. A Spanish suicide ideation tweet dataset was translated into five other languages using SeamlessM4T. Each model was fine-tuned on this multilingual data and evaluated across classification metrics. Results showed mT5 achieving the best performance overall with F1 scores above 85%, highlighting capabilities for cross-lingual transfer learning. The English and Spanish translations also displayed high quality based on perplexity. Our exploration underscores the importance of considering linguistic diversity in developing automated multilingual tools to identify suicidal risk. Limitations exist around semantic fidelity in translations and ethical implications which provide guidance for future human-in-the-loop evaluations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15498 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. 10-fold Cross-Validation for each language model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ahmet Emre Alada g , Serra Muderrisoglu, Naz Berfu Akbas, Oguzhan Zahmacioglu, and Haluk O Bingol. 2018. Detecting suicidal ideation on forums: proof-of-concept study. Journal of medical Internet research, 20(6):e9840

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Lo \" c Barrault, Yu-An Chung, Mariano Coria Meglioli, David Dale, Ning Dong, Mark Duppenthaler, Paul-Ambroise Duquenne, Brian Ellis, Hady Elsahar, Justin Haaheim, et al. 2023. Seamless: Multilingual expressive and streaming speech translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.05187

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Runa Bhaumik, Vineet Srivastava, Arash Jalali, Shanta Ghosh, and Ranganathan Chandrasekaran. 2023. Mindwatch: A smart cloud-based ai solution for suicide ideation detection leveraging large language models. medRxiv, pages 2023--09

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Fatima Chiroma, Han Liu, and Mihaela Cocea. 2018. Suiciderelated text classification with prism algorithm. In 2018 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics (ICMLC), volume 2, pages 575--580. IEEE

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Glen Coppersmith, Mark Dredze, Craig Harman, Kristy Hollingshead, and Margaret Mitchell. 2015. Clpsych 2015 shared task: Depression and ptsd on twitter. In Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on computational linguistics and clinical psychology: from linguistic signal to clinical reality, pages 31--39

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Bart Desmet and V \'e Ronique Hoste. 2013. Emotion detection in suicide notes. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(16):6351--6358

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    SP Devika, MR Pooja, MS Arpitha, and Ravi Vinayakumar. 2023. Bert-based approach for suicide and depression identification. In Proceedings of Third International Conference on Advances in Computer Engineering and Communication Systems: ICACECS 2022, pages 435--444. Springer

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1423 BERT : Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding . In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North A merican Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long a...

    doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 2019

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Yoav Goldberg. 2022. Neural network methods for natural language processing. Springer Nature

    2022

  2. [10]

    Farsheed Haque, Ragib Un Nur, Shaeekh Al Jahan, Zarar Mahmud, and Faisal Muhammad Shah. 2020. A transformer based approach to detect suicidal ideation using pre-trained language models. In 2020 23rd international conference on computer and information technology (ICCIT), pages...

    2020

  3. [11]

    Rezaul Haque, Naimul Islam, Maidul Islam, and Md Manjurul Ahsan. 2022. A comparative analysis on suicidal ideation detection using nlp, machine, and deep learning. Technologies, 10(3):57

    2022

  4. [12]

    Hua He and Jimmy Lin. 2016. Pairwise word interaction modeling with deep neural networks for semantic similarity measurement. In Proceedings of the 2016 conference of the north American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: human language technologies, page...

    2016

  5. [13]

    Sepp Hochreiter and J \"u rgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation, 9(8):1735--1780

    1997

  6. [14]

    Xiaolei Huang, Xin Li, Lei Zhang, Tianli Liu, David Chiu, and Tingshao Zhu. 2015. Topic model for identifying suicidal ideation in chinese microblog. In Proceedings of the 29th pacific asia conference on language, information and computation, pages 553--562. Waseda University

    2015

  7. [15]

    Swati Jain, Suraj Prakash Narayan, Rupesh Kumar Dewang, Utkarsh Bhartiya, Nalini Meena, and Varun Kumar. 2019. A machine learning based depression analysis and suicidal ideation detection system using questionnaires and twitter. In 2019 IEEE students conference on engineering ...

    2019

  8. [16]

    Shaoxiong Ji, Shirui Pan, Xue Li, Erik Cambria, Guodong Long, and Zi Huang. 2020. Suicidal ideation detection: A review of machine learning methods and applications. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 8(1):214--226

    2020

  9. [17]

    Shaoxiong Ji, Celina Ping Yu, Sai-fu Fung, Shirui Pan, and Guodong Long. 2018. Supervised learning for suicidal ideation detection in online user content. Complexity, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Natalie J Jones and Craig Bennell. 2007. The development and validation of statistical prediction rules for discriminating between genuine and simulated suicide notes. Archives of Suicide Research, 11(2):219--233

    2007

  11. [19]

    Mohsinul Kabir, Tasnim Ahmed, Md Bakhtiar Hasan, Md Tahmid Rahman Laskar, Tarun Kumar Joarder, Hasan Mahmud, and Kamrul Hasan. 2023. Deptweet: A typology for social media texts to detect depression severities. Computers in Human Behavior, 139:107503

    2023

  12. [20]

    Richard T Liu and Ivan Miller. 2014. Life events and suicidal ideation and behavior: A systematic review. Clinical psychology review, 34(3):181--192

    2014

  13. [21]

    Yinhan Liu, Myle Ott, Naman Goyal, Jingfei Du, Mandar Joshi, Danqi Chen, Omer Levy, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2019. Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    David E Losada and Fabio Crestani. 2016. A test collection for research on depression and language use. In International conference of the cross-language evaluation forum for European languages, pages 28--39. Springer

    2016

  15. [23]

    David E Losada, Fabio Crestani, and Javier Parapar. 2017. Clef 2017 erisk overview: Early risk prediction on the internet: Experimental foundations. CLEF (Working Notes), 850

    2017

  16. [24]

    Robinson Z Lumontod III. 2020. Seeing the invisible: Extracting signs of depression and suicidal ideation from college students’ writing using liwc a computerized text analysis. Int. J. Res. Stud. Educ, 9:31--44

    2020

  17. [25]

    Yukun Ma, Haiyun Peng, and Erik Cambria. 2018. Targeted aspect-based sentiment analysis via embedding commonsense knowledge into an attentive lstm. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 32

    2018

  18. [26]

    Maher Maalouf. 2011. Logistic regression in data analysis: an overview. International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, 3(3):281--299

    2011

  19. [27]

    Naoki Masuda, Issei Kurahashi, and Hiroko Onari. 2013. Suicide ideation of individuals in online social networks. PloS one, 8(4):e62262

    2013

  20. [28]

    Bridianne O'dea, Stephen Wan, Philip J Batterham, Alison L Calear, Cecile Paris, and Helen Christensen. 2015. Detecting suicidality on twitter. Internet Interventions, 2(2):183--188

    2015

  21. [29]

    Yaakov Ophir, Refael Tikochinski, Christa SC Asterhan, Itay Sisso, and Roi Reichart. 2020. Deep neural networks detect suicide risk from textual facebook posts. Scientific reports, 10(1):16685

    2020

  22. [30]

    World Health Organization et al. 2021. Suicide worldwide in 2019: global health estimates

    2021

  23. [31]

    John Pestian, Henry Nasrallah, Pawel Matykiewicz, Aurora Bennett, and Antoon Leenaars. 2010. Suicide note classification using natural language processing: A content analysis. Biomedical informatics insights, 3:BII--S4706

    2010

  24. [32]

    John P Pestian, Pawel Matykiewicz, and Michelle Linn-Gust. 2012. What's in a note: construction of a suicide note corpus. Biomedical informatics insights, 5:BII--S10213

    2012

  25. [33]

    Syed Tanzeel Rabani, Qamar Rayees Khan, and Akib Mohi Ud Din Khanday. 2020. Detection of suicidal ideation on twitter using machine learning & ensemble approaches. Baghdad science journal, 17(4):1328--1328

    2020

  26. [34]

    E Rajesh Kumar, KVSN Rama Rao, Soumya Ranjan Nayak, and Ramesh Chandra. 2020. Suicidal ideation prediction in twitter data using machine learning techniques. Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics, 23(1):117--125

    2020

  27. [35]

    Diana Ram \' rez-Cifuentes, Ana Freire, Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Joaquim Punt \' , Pilar Medina-Bravo, Diego Alejandro Velazquez, Josep Maria Gonfaus, and Jordi Gonz \`a lez. 2020. Detection of suicidal ideation on social media: multimodal, relational, and behavioral analysis. Jou...

    2020

  28. [36]

    Shini Renjith, Annie Abraham, Surya B Jyothi, Lekshmi Chandran, and Jincy Thomson. 2022. An ensemble deep learning technique for detecting suicidal ideation from posts in social media platforms. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences, 34(10):9564--9575

    2022

  29. [37]

    Ramit Sawhney, Prachi Manchanda, Puneet Mathur, Rajiv Shah, and Raj Singh. 2018. Exploring and learning suicidal ideation connotations on social media with deep learning. In Proceedings of the 9th workshop on computational approaches to subjectivity, sentiment and social media...

    2018

  30. [38]

    Ortega, Rodolfo Joel Zevallos, and Laura Ihle

    Annika Schoene, John E. Ortega, Rodolfo Joel Zevallos, and Laura Ihle. 2025. Lexicography saves lives (lsl): Automatically translating suicide-related language. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics. International Committee on Computa...

    2025

  31. [39]

    Annika Marie Schoene and Nina Dethlefs. 2016. Automatic identification of suicide notes from linguistic and sentiment features. In Proceedings of the 10th SIGHUM workshop on language technology for cultural heritage, social sciences, and humanities, pages 128--133

    2016

  32. [40]

    Faisal Muhammad Shah, Farsheed Haque, Ragib Un Nur, Shaeekh Al Jahan, and Zarar Mamud. 2020. A hybridized feature extraction approach to suicidal ideation detection from social media post. In 2020 IEEE Region 10 Symposium (TENSYMP), pages 985--988. IEEE

    2020

  33. [41]

    Hajime Sueki. 2015. The association of suicide-related twitter use with suicidal behaviour: a cross-sectional study of young internet users in japan. Journal of affective disorders, 170:155--160

    2015

  34. [42]

    Michael M Tadesse, Hongfei Lin, Bo Xu, and Liang Yang. 2019. Detection of depression-related posts in reddit social media forum. Ieee Access, 7:44883--44893

    2019

  35. [43]

    Ilija Tavchioski, Marko Robnik- S ikonja, and Senja Pollak. 2023. Detection of depression on social networks using transformers and ensembles. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.05325

    2023 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Kid Valeriano, Alexia Condori-Larico, and Josè Sulla-Torres. 2020. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0110489 Detection of suicidal intent in spanish language social networks using machine learning . International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11(4)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30

    2017

  38. [46]

    M Johnson Vioules, Bilel Moulahi, J \'e r \^o me Az \'e , and Sandra Bringay. 2018. Detection of suicide-related posts in twitter data streams. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 62(1):7--1

    2018

  39. [47]

    Linting Xue, Noah Constant, Adam Roberts, Mihir Kale, Rami Al-Rfou, Aditya Siddhant, Aditya Barua, and Colin Raffel. 2020. mt5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11934

    2020 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hannah Yao, Sina Rashidian, Xinyu Dong, Hongyi Duanmu, Richard N Rosenthal, and Fusheng Wang. 2020. Detection of suicidality among opioid users on reddit: machine learning--based approach. Journal of medical internet research, 22(11):e15293

    2020

  41. [49]

    Tianlin Zhang, Annika M Schoene, and Sophia Ananiadou. 2022. Automatic identification of suicide notes with a transformer-based deep learning model elsevier, vol. 25

    2022

  42. [50]

    Ayah Zirikly, Philip Resnik, \"O zlem Uzuner, and Kristy Hollingshead. 2019. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-3003 CLP sych 2019 shared task: Predicting the degree of suicide risk in R eddit posts . In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Clinical ...

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    online" 'onlinestring :=

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint eprinttype howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year doi pubmed url lastchecked label extra.label sort.label short.list...

  44. [52]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.