Yehor Tereshchenko

Yehor Tereshchenko, Mika Hämäläinen, Svitlana Myroniuk

The evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) for translation tasks has primarily focused on high-resource languages, leaving a significant gap in understanding their performance on low-resource and endangered languages. This study presents a comprehensive comparison of OpenAI's GPT models, specifically examining the differences between reasoning and non-reasoning architectures for translating between Finnish and four low-resource Uralic languages: Komi-Zyrian, Moksha, Erzya, and Udmurt. Using a parallel corpus of literary texts, we evaluate model willingness to attempt translation through refusal rate analysis across different model architectures. Our findings reveal significant performance variations between reasoning and non-reasoning models, with reasoning models showing 16 percentage points lower refusal rates. The results provide valuable insights for researchers and practitioners working with Uralic languages and contribute to the broader understanding of reasoning model capabilities for endangered language preservation.

Yehor Tereshchenko, Mika Hämäläinen

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly evolved in recent years, showcasing remarkable capabilities in natural language understanding and generation. However, these advancements also raise critical ethical questions regarding safety, potential misuse, discrimination and overall societal impact. This article provides a comparative analysis of the ethical performance of various AI models, including the brand new DeepSeek-V3(R1 with reasoning and without), various GPT variants (4o, 3.5 Turbo, 4 Turbo, o1/o3 mini) and Gemini (1.5 flash, 2.0 flash and 2.0 flash exp) and highlights the need for robust human oversight, especially in situations with high stakes. Furthermore, we present a new metric for calculating harm in LLMs called Relative Danger Coefficient (RDC).

Yehor Tereshchenko, Mika Hämäläinen

This paper presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods for automated toxicity detection in online gaming chats. Traditional machine learning models with embeddings, large language models (LLMs) with zero-shot and few-shot prompting, fine-tuned transformer models, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approaches are evaluated. The evaluation framework assesses three critical dimensions: classification accuracy, processing speed, and computational costs. A hybrid moderation system architecture is proposed that optimizes human moderator workload through automated detection and incorporates continuous learning mechanisms. The experimental results demonstrate significant performance variations across methods, with fine-tuned DistilBERT achieving optimal accuracy-cost trade-offs. The findings provide empirical evidence for deploying cost-effective, efficient content moderation systems in dynamic online gaming environments.