Cited by 76Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningSpam and Phishing Detection

Cyberbullying detection in social media text based on character-level convolutional neural network with shortcuts

Lu, Nijia, Wu, Guohua, Zhang, Zhen, Zheng, Yitao, Ren, Yizhi, Choo, Kim‐Kwang Raymond·2020·Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience

Abstract

Summary As people spend increasingly more time on social networks, cyberbullying has become a social problem that needs to be solved by machine learning methods. Our research focuses on textual cyberbullying detection because text is the most common form of social media. However, the content information in social media is short, noisy, and unstructured with incorrect spellings and symbols, and this impacts the performance of some traditional machine learning methods based on vocabulary knowledge. For this reason, we propose a Char‐CNNS (Character‐levelConvolutionalNeuralNetwork withShortcuts) model to identify whether the text in social media contains cyberbullying. We use characters as the smallest unit of learning, enabling the model to overcome spelling errors and intentional obfuscation in real‐world corpora. Shortcuts are utilized to stitch different levels of features to learn more granular bullying signals, and a focal loss function is adopted to overcome the class imbalance problem. We also provide a new ChineseWeibocomment dataset specifically for cyberbullying detection, and experiments are performed on both the Chinese Weibo dataset and the English Tweet dataset. The experimental results show that our approach is competitive with state‐of‐the‐art techniques on cyberbullying detection task.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpe.5627

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A few studies exploit RNN-based techniques (LSTM, BiLSTM, RNN) while some other studies use CNN-based techniques (CNN, PCNN, Char-CNNS) to detect cyberbullying from different sources.

    “A few studies [21,134] exploit RNN-based techniques, i.e., LSTM, BiLSTM, RNN, etc., while some other studies [5,137] use CNN-based techniques (i.e., CNN, PCNN, Char-CNNS, etc.) to detect cyberbullying from different sources.”

    From A Review on Deep-Learning-Based Cyberbullying Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lu, N., Wu, G., Zhang, Z., Zheng, Y., Ren, Y., & Choo, K. R.
Affiliations
  • Hangzhou Dianzi University (CN)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio (US)
Corresponding author
Ren, Yizhi
Venue
Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-01-03
Volume
32
Issue
23
ISSN
  • 1532-0626 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-0634
OpenAlex
W2997975249
Cited by
76
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 3
FWCI
4.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Concurrency and Computation Practice and Experience (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (No. LY18F020017)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61872120)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
Keywords
cyberbullying detection, social media text, character-level convolutional neural network, skip connections, focal loss, class imbalance, Twitter, spelling errors, text obfuscation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review