Margaret Capetz

Haniyeh Ehsani Oskouie, Christina Chance, Claire Huang et al.

Content moderation and toxicity classification represent critical tasks with significant social implications. However, studies have shown that major classification models exhibit tendencies to magnify or reduce biases and potentially overlook or disadvantage certain marginalized groups within their classification processes. Researchers suggest that the positionality of annotators influences the gold standard labels in which the models learned from propagate annotators' bias. To further investigate the impact of annotator positionality, we delve into fine-tuning BERTweet and HateBERT on the dataset while using topic-modeling strategies for content moderation. The results indicate that fine-tuning the models on specific topics results in a notable improvement in the F1 score of the models when compared to the predictions generated by other prominent classification models such as GPT-4, PerspectiveAPI, and RewireAPI. These findings further reveal that the state-of-the-art large language models exhibit significant limitations in accurately detecting and interpreting text toxicity contrasted with earlier methodologies. Code is available at https://github.com/aheldis/Toxicity-Classification.git.

Avalon Vinella, Margaret Capetz, Rebecca Pattichis et al.

In recent years, climate change repercussions have increasingly captured public interest. Consequently, corporations are emphasizing their environmental efforts in sustainability reports to bolster their public image. Yet, the absence of stringent regulations in review of such reports allows potential greenwashing. In this study, we introduce a novel preliminary methodology to train a language model on generated labels for greenwashing risk. Our primary contributions encompass: developing a preliminary mathematical formulation to quantify greenwashing risk, a fine-tuned ClimateBERT model for this problem, and a comparative analysis of results. On a test set comprising of sustainability reports, our best model achieved an average accuracy score of 86.34% and F1 score of 0.67, demonstrating that our proof-of-concept methodology shows a promising direction of exploration for this task.