Papers for

moderation tool developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Guard models give wrong high confidence answers when unsure

Guard Models Are Overconfident Where Base Models Are Uncertain

Abstract: Guard models are used as safety classifiers, with confidence scores driving downstream moderation decisions. We evaluate five guard models for prompt classification and find that although several are nearly calibrated on clean inputs, adversarial attacks degrade their calibration by an order of magnitude, turning false negatives into high-confidence errors indistinguishable from correct detections. Comparing each guard with its corresponding base LM, we find that uncertainty signals often remain available, with the base model typically expressing uncertainty on the same inputs where the guard fails. Layer-wise analyses localize this guard-base divergence to later layers, where guard models exhibit sharper safe/unsafe separation and lower-rank representations, while adversarial harmful inputs lie closer to the clean-safe region. These findings highlight a mismatch between guard confidence and base model uncertainty under attack.

Tue 29 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Guard models are designed to spot unsafe or harmful inputs and warn when something could go wrong. This paper finds that while these models usually give sensible confidence scores on normal inputs, they become overconfident and make mistakes when faced with tricky or adversarial inputs. Interestingly, the original language model they watch over still shows uncertainty in those cases. The researchers also looked inside the models and found differences in how the guard and base models process information, especially in the later stages.
Open → 2609.36477v1

Scope-conditioned multilingual counterspeech improves stereotype targeting

Deconstructing Stereotypes: Scope-Conditioned Generation for Effective Multilingual Counterspeech

Abstract: Counterspeech (CS) - direct responses that counter online Hate Speech (HS) using reasoning and alternative viewpoints - has emerged as an alternative to content removal. Current automatic CS generation methods, however, frequently produce generic, ineffective replies that fail to target the implicit stereotypes behind HS. To bridge this gap, we propose a novel scope-conditioned generation framework that explicitly integrates structured stereotype characteristics into Large Language Models prompts. We validate our approach on a novel, human-curated dataset annotated in English, Italian, and Spanish. Extensive evaluations show that stereotype-conditioned prompting substantially outperforms generic baselines across all three languages, obtaining significant gains in factuality, specificity, cogency, and effectiveness for both explicit and implicit implied stereotypes.

Tue 15 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Online hate speech often relies on stereotypes, and automatically generated replies tend to be too generic to effectively respond. The authors propose a method that helps language models use specific details about stereotypes when creating counterspeech responses. They tested this method on a new dataset in English, Italian, and Spanish, showing it produces more factual, specific, and persuasive replies. This approach helps make counterspeech better at addressing both obvious and hidden stereotypes behind hateful messages.
Open → 2609.16906v1