MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387133783 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.130413

Detecting Cyberbullying on Social Media Using Support Vector Machine: A Case Study on Twitter

2023· article· en· W4387133783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Al-Khowarizmi Al-Khowarizmi, Indah Purnama Sari, Halim Maulana

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUrmia University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsSocial mediaSupport vector machineComputer scienceInternet privacyComputer securityPsychologyWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyberbullying, a prevalent issue in digital media, particularly social media, poses a significant concern owing to its pervasive nature and potential harm.Social media platforms permit users to exchange opinions freely, which, while fostering open discourse, can also trigger instances of cyberbullying.This study focusses on Twitter discourses related to Indonesia's contentious public policy, "Cipta Kerja".The inherent polarity of views towards this policy has given rise to instances of cyberbullying.An extensive dataset comprising 2400 tweets was meticulously assembled, employing the keyword "Cipta Kerja".This dataset was subsequently partitioned into training and testing subsets to facilitate cyberbullying detection through computational algorithms.Sentiment analysis played a crucial role in this process, with the Support Vector Machine (SVM) method demonstrating remarkable reliability in classifying sentiment-related issues and, therefore, detecting cyberbullyings.The SVM method, using a linear kernel function, achieved a commendable accuracy rate of 92.7% in cyberbullying detection.This study's results underscore the effectiveness of SVM in identifying instances of cyberbullying on social media platforms, offering new promise for safeguarding digital spaces.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207