Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Investigating Annotator Bias in Large Language Models for Hate Speech Detection

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 2406.11109 v5 pith:MC5XBELT submitted 2024-06-17 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

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

Data annotation, the practice of assigning descriptive labels to raw data, is pivotal in optimizing the performance of machine learning models. However, it is a resource-intensive process susceptible to biases introduced by annotators. The emergence of sophisticated Large Language Models (LLMs) presents a unique opportunity to modernize and streamline this complex procedure. While existing research extensively evaluates the efficacy of LLMs, as annotators, this paper delves into the biases present in LLMs when annotating hate speech data. Our research contributes to understanding biases in four key categories: gender, race, religion, and disability with four LLMs: GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, Llama-3.1 and Gemma-2. Specifically targeting highly vulnerable groups within these categories, we analyze annotator biases. Furthermore, we conduct a comprehensive examination of potential factors contributing to these biases by scrutinizing the annotated data. We introduce our custom hate speech detection dataset, HateBiasNet, to conduct this research. Additionally, we perform the same experiments on the ETHOS (Mollas et al. 2022) dataset also for comparative analysis. This paper serves as a crucial resource, guiding researchers and practitioners in harnessing the potential of LLMs for data annotation, thereby fostering advancements in this critical field.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Mapping Toxic Comments Across Demographics: A Dataset from German Public Broadcasting

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A new German toxic-comment dataset with channel-level age estimates reveals age differences in toxic speech, but age is inferred from channel audience profiles, not individual users.

Pith tools