Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

SLM-Mod: Small Language Models Surpass LLMs at Content Moderation

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 2410.13155 v2 pith:XORUJC73 submitted 2024-10-17 cs.CL

SLM-Mod: Small Language Models Surpass LLMs at Content Moderation

classification cs.CL
keywords moderationcontentmodelslanguagellmsslmscommunitiescommunity-specific
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in many natural language understanding tasks, including content moderation. However, these models can be expensive to query in real-time and do not allow for a community-specific approach to content moderation. To address these challenges, we explore the use of open-source small language models (SLMs) for community-specific content moderation tasks. We fine-tune and evaluate SLMs (less than 15B parameters) by comparing their performance against much larger open- and closed-sourced models in both a zero-shot and few-shot setting. Using 150K comments from 15 popular Reddit communities, we find that SLMs outperform zero-shot LLMs at content moderation -- 11.5% higher accuracy and 25.7% higher recall on average across all communities. Moreover, few-shot in-context learning leads to only a marginal increase in the performance of LLMs, still lacking compared to SLMs. We further show the promise of cross-community content moderation, which has implications for new communities and the development of cross-platform moderation techniques. Finally, we outline directions for future work on language model based content moderation. Code and models can be found at https://github.com/AGoyal0512/SLM-Mod.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Operational Evidence Gaps for LLMs in Fraud Detection and Trust-and-Safety Workflows

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    A survey of 49 LLM fraud and trust-and-safety papers finds that fraud work reports almost no per-decision latency, cost, or calibration evidence, while moderation work reports more.