Cited by 94Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionText and Document Classification TechnologiesSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Cyberbullying Detection: An Ensemble Based Machine Learning Approach

Alam, Kazi Saeed, Bhowmik, Shovan, Prosun, Priyo Ranjan Kundu·2021·2021 Third International Conference on Intelligent Communication Technologies and Virtual Mobile Networks (ICICV)

Abstract

Research on cyberbullying detection is gaining increasing attention in recent years as both individual victims and societies are greatly affected by it. Moreover, ease of access to social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. has led to an exponential increase in the mistreatment of people in the form of hateful messages, bullying, sexism, racism, aggressive content, harassment, toxic comment etc. Thus there is an extensive need to identify, control and reduce the bullying contents spread over social media sites, which has motivated us to conduct this research to automate the detection process of offensive language or cyberbullying. Our main aim is to build single and double ensemble-based voting model to classify the contents into two groups: `offensive' or `non-offensive'. For this purpose, we have chosen four machine learning classifiers and three ensemble models with two different feature extraction techniques combined with various n-gram analysis on a dataset extracted from Twitter. In our work, Logistic Regression and Bagging ensemble model classifier have performed individually best in detecting cyberbullying which has been outperformed by our proposed SLE and DLE voting classifiers. Our proposed SLE and DLE models yield the best performance of 96% when TF-IDF (Unigram) feature extraction is applied with K-Fold cross-validation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icicv50876.2021.9388499

Cites

17 of 17 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 19 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alam, K. S., Bhowmik, S., & Prosun, P. R. K.
Affiliations
  • Khulna University of Engineering and Technology (BD)
  • Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology (BD)
Venue
2021 Third International Conference on Intelligent Communication Technologies and Virtual Mobile Networks (ICICV)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2021-02-04
Pages
710-715
OpenAlex
W3146521653
Cited by
94
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 1
FWCI
7.74
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on Intelligent Communication Technologies and Virtual Mobile Networks (ICICV) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
cyberbullying detection, offensive language detection, ensemble voting classifier, bagging, social media text, Twitter, TF-IDF feature extraction, n-gram analysis, logistic regression, online harassment

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