Skip to main content

Toxicity in Texts and Images on the Internet

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Speech and Computer (SPECOM 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12335))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper we studied the most typical characteristics of toxic images on the web. To get a set of toxic images we collected a set of 8800 images from 4chan.org. Then we trained a BERT-based classifier to find toxic texts with accompanying images. We manually labelled approximately 2000 images accompanying these texts. This revealed that toxic content in images does not correlate with toxic content in texts. On top of manually annotated images there was trained a neural network that inferred labels for unannotated pictures. Neural network layer activations for these images were clustered and manually classified to find the most typical ways of expressing aggression in images. We find that racial stereotypes are the main cause of toxicity in images (https://github.com/denis-gordeev/specom20).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.kaggle.com/c/jigsaw-toxic-comment-classification-challenge.

  2. 2.

    https://www.kaggle.com/c/jigsaw-unintended-bias-in-toxicity-classification/.

  3. 3.

    https://github.com/NVIDIA/apex.

  4. 4.

    https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Detox/.

  5. 5.

    https://tfhub.dev/google/

References

  1. Cheng, L., Guo, R., Silva, Y., Hall, D., Liu, H.: Hierarchical attention networks for cyberbullying detection on the instagram social network. In: Proceedings of the 2019 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 235–243. SIAM (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cheng, L., Li, J., Silva, Y.N., Hall, D.L., Liu, H.: XBully: cyberbullying detection within a multi-modal context. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 339–347 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cohen, J.: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Measur. 20(1), 37–46 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Davidson, T., Warmsley, D., Macy, M., Weber, I.: Automated hate speech detection and the problem of offensive language. In: Proceedings of the ICWSM (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Devlin, J., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K.: BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding, October 2018. http://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805

  6. DeWall, C.N., Anderson, C.A., Bushman, B.J.: The general aggression model: theoretical extensions to violence. Psychol. Violence 1(3), 245 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Duggan, M.: Online harassment, vol. 2017 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hitkul, H., Shah, R.R., Kumaraguru, P., Satoh, S.: Maybe look closer? Detecting trolling prone images on instagram. In: 2019 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Multimedia Big Data (BigMM), pp. 448–456. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Khandagale, S., Xiao, H., Babbar, R.: Bonsai-diverse and shallow trees for extreme multi-label classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.08249 (2019)

  10. Lapidot-Lefler, N., Barak, A.: Effects of anonymity, invisibility, and lack of eye-contact on toxic online disinhibition. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(2), 434–443 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Malmasi, S., Zampieri, M.: Detecting Hate Speech in Social Media. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, pp. 467–472 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. McInnes, L., Healy, J., Melville, J.: UMAP: uniform manifold approximation and projection for dimension reduction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.03426 (2018)

  13. Niam, I.M.A., Irawan, B., Setianingsih, C., Putra, B.P.: Hate speech detection using latent semantic analysis (LSA) method based on image. In: 2018 International Conference on Control, Electronics, Renewable Energy and Communications (ICCEREC), pp. 166–171. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Potapova, R., Potapov, V.: Human as acmeologic entity in social network discourse (multidimensional approach). In: Karpov, A., Potapova, R., Mporas, I. (eds.) SPECOM 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10458, pp. 407–416. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66429-3_40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Rousseeuw, P.J.: Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 20, 53–65 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Russakovsky, O., et al.: Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge. Int. J. Comput. Vision 115(3), 211–252 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Sandler, M., Howard, A., Zhu, M., Zhmoginov, A., Chen, L.C.: MobileNetV2: inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 4510–4520 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Suler, J.: The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 7(3), 321–326 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Szegedy, C., Vanhoucke, V., Ioffe, S., Shlens, J., Wojna, Z.: Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 2818–2826 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Van Horn, G., et al.: The inaturalist species classification and detection dataset. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 8769–8778 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vaswani, A., et al.: Attention is all you need. In: Advances in Neural Information Processsing Systems, vol. 2017, pp. 5999–6009, December 2017. http://papers.nips.cc/paper/7181-attention-is-all-you-need

  22. Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., Funtowicz, M., Brew, J.: HuggingFace’s Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processing. arXiv abs/1910.0 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yao, M., Chelmis, C., Zois, D.S.: Cyberbullying ends here: Towards robust detection of cyberbullying in social media. In: The World Wide Web Conference. pp. 3427–3433 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) according to the research project 18-18-00477.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Denis Gordeev .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Gordeev, D., Potapov, V. (2020). Toxicity in Texts and Images on the Internet. In: Karpov, A., Potapova, R. (eds) Speech and Computer. SPECOM 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12335. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60276-5_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60276-5_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60275-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-60276-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics