CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 72Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionSpam and Phishing DetectionMisinformation and Its Impacts

Cyberbullying Detection in Social Networks Using Deep Learning Based Models; A Reproducibility Study

Open access
Dadvar, Maral, Eckert, Kai·2018·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1812.08046arXiv 1812.08046
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cyberbullying is a disturbing online misbehaviour with troubling consequences. It appears in different forms, and in most of the social networks, it is in textual format. Automatic detection of such incidents requires intelligent systems. Most of the existing studies have approached this problem with conventional machine learning models and the majority of the developed models in these studies are adaptable to a single social network at a time. In recent studies, deep learning based models have found their way in the detection of cyberbullying incidents, claiming that they can overcome the limitations of the conventional models, and improve the detection performance. In this paper, we investigate the findings of a recent literature in this regard. We successfully reproduced the findings of this literature and validated their findings using the same datasets, namely Wikipedia, Twitter, and Formspring, used by the authors. Then we expanded our work by applying the developed methods on a new YouTube dataset (~54k posts by ~4k users) and investigated the performance of the models in new social media platforms. We also transferred and evaluated the performance of the models trained on one platform to another platform. Our findings show that the deep learning based models outperform the machine learning models previously applied to the same YouTube dataset. We believe that the deep learning based models can also benefit from integrating other sources of information and looking into the impact of profile information of the users in social networks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1812.08046

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • DL models outperform ML models when encountering complex linguistic expressions such as harassment with cyberbullying.

    “DL models outperform MLmodels when we encounter complex linguistic expressions such as harassment with cyberbullying [25].”

    From A Review on Deep-Learning-Based Cyberbullying Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Conclusion (p. 11) reports that DNN models with transfer learning outperformed earlier ML results for cyberbullying detection on a YouTube dataset. It does not establish that the advantage occurs specifically with complex linguistic expressions or harassment, and the citing sentence generalizes beyond that dataset. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Keras is a popular framework for cyberbullying detection.

    “However, Keras is also a popular framework [20,25,171,184] for cyberbullying detection since the framework is built to provide a simple interface for quick prototyping by building active neural networks that can work upon TensorFlow.”

    From A Review on Deep-Learning-Based Cyberbullying Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [25]

    Section 2.3 (p. 5) says the authors implemented their cyberbullying-detection models using the Keras Python package. That establishes Keras as a framework used for this purpose, but the paper does not establish that it is popular or attribute its use to quick prototyping or TensorFlow. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Dadvar et al. [25] found that DL-based models outperform traditional ML models.

    “Dadvar et al. [25] found that DL-based models outperform traditional ML models.”

    From A Review on Deep-Learning-Based Cyberbullying Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [25]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. [2][2] R. S. Tokunaga, 'Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization,' Computers in Human Behavior , vol. 26, no. 3. pp. 277-287, 2010. -
  2. [4][4] Y. Chen, S. Zhu, Y. Zhou, and H. Xu, 'Detecting Offensive Language in Social Media to Protect Adolescent Online Safety,' Int. Confernece Soc. Comput. , vol. 168, 2012. -
  3. [5][5] J. van der Zwaan, V. Dignum, and C. Jonker, 'Simulating peer support for victims of cyberbullying,' in Belgian/Netherlands Artificial Intelligence Conference , 2010. -
  4. [6][6] M. Dadvar, D. Trieschnigg, and F. de Jong, 'Experts and Machines against Bullies: A Hybrid Approach to Detect Cyberbullies,' in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) , vol. 8436 LNAI, Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 275-281. -
  5. [7][7] K. Dinakar, R. Reichart, and H. Lieberman, 'Modeling the Detection of Textual Cyberbullying,' Assoc. Adv. Artif. Intell. , pp. 11-17, 2011. -
  6. [8][8] C. Van Hee et al. , 'Automatic Detection of Cyberbullying in Social Media Text,' arxiv.org , 2018. -
  7. [9][9] M. Dadvar and F. de Jong, 'Improved Cyberbullying Detection Through Personal Profiles,' in International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedingsonal Conference on Cyberbullying , 2012. -
  8. [10][10] X. Zhang et al. , 'Cyberbullying Detection with a Pronunciation Based Convolutional Neural Network,' in 2016 15th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA) , 2016, pp. 740-745. -
  9. [11][11] S. Agrawal and A. Awekar, 'Deep Learning for Detecting Cyberbullying Across Multiple Social Media Platforms,' Adv. Inf. Retr. , pp. 141-153, 2018. -
  10. [12][12] K. Reynolds, A. Kontostathis, and L. Edwards, 'Using machine learning to detect cyberbullying,' Proc. - 10th Int. Conf. Mach. Learn. Appl. ICMLA 2011 , vol. 2, pp. 241-244, Dec. 2011. -
  11. [13][13] Z. Waseem and D. Hovy, 'Hateful Symbols or Hateful People? Predictive Features for Hate Speech Detection on Twitter,' in Proceedings of the NAACL Student Research Workshop , 2016, pp. 88-93. -
  12. [14][14] E. Wulczyn, N. Thain, and L. Dixon, 'Ex Machina: Personal Attacks Seen at Scale,' Proc. 26th Int. Conf. World Wide Web - WWW '17 , pp. 1391-1399, 2016. -
  13. [15][15] M. Dadvar and A. Niamir, 'Maximum Entropy Modelling of Bully Users in Social Networks,' in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) , 2015. -
  14. [17][17] K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman, 'Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition,' Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. , pp. 1-14, Sep. 2015. -
  15. [18][18] T. Chen, R. Xu, Y. He, and X. Wang, 'Improving sentiment analysis via sentence type classification using BiLSTM-CRF and CNN,' Expert Syst. Appl. , vol. 72, pp. 221-230, 2017. -
  16. [19][19] Y. Kim, 'Convolutional Neural Networks for Sentence Classification,' arxiv.org , 2014. -
  17. [20][20] C. Zhou, C. Sun, Z. Liu, and F. C. M. Lau, 'A C-LSTM Neural Network for Text Classification,' Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. , pp. 649-657, 2015. -
  18. [22][22] P. Zhou, Z. Qi, S. Zheng, J. Xu, H. Bao, and B. Xu, 'Text Classification Improved by Integrating Bidirectional LSTM with Two-dimensional Max Pooling,' arXiv , Nov. 2016. -
  19. [23][23] P. Zhou et al. , 'Attention-Based Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Networks for Relation Classification,' in Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) , 2016, pp. 207-212. -
  20. [24][24] J. Pennington, R. Socher, and C. Manning, 'Glove: Global Vectors for Word Representation,' in Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Dadvar and Eckert 13 Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) , 2014, pp. 1532-1543. -
  21. [25][25] D. Tang, F. Wei, N. Yang, M. Zhou, T. Liu, and B. Qin, 'Learning Sentiment-Specific Word Embedding,' Acl , pp. 1555-1565, 2014. -
  22. [26][26] M. Dadvar, R. Ordelman, F. De Jong, and D. Trieschnigg, 'Improved cyberbullying detection using gender information,' in Dutch-Belgian Information Retrieval Workshop, DIR 2012 , 2012, pp. 23-26. -
  23. [27][27] M. Dadvar, D. Trieschnigg, R. Ordelman, and F. de Jong, 'Improving Cyberbullying Detection with User Context,' in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) , vol. 7814 LNCS, 2013, pp. 693-696.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dadvar, M., & Eckert, K.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1812.08046
arXiv
1812.08046
OpenAlex
W6904019207
Cited by
71
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
Keywords
cyberbullying detection, social networks, deep learning models, reproducibility

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