MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412533364 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2024.8.008

Hate speech detection in Arabic social networks using deep learning and fine-tuned embeddings

2025· article· en· W4412533364 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samar Al-Saqqa, Arafat Awajan, Bassam Hammo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArabicComputer scienceDeep learningSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, opinions and communication can be easily expressed through social media networks that have allowed users to communicate and share their opinions and views, resulting in massive user-generated content. This content may contain text that is hateful to large groups or specific individuals. Therefore, in most website policies, automatic hate speech detection is required, and early automatic detection or filtering of such content is critical and necessary in online social networks, especially with large and increasingly user-generated content. This paper presents a suggested model to enhance the detection performance of hate speech using deep learning models with two types of word embedding models, the first model is Arabic models based on Wor2Vec including AraVec and Mazajak. The second is word embedding techniques models based on BERT including three pre-trained models namely ARABERT, MARBERT and CAMeLBERT. Common metrics in text classification are used including precision, recall, accuracy, and F1 score for model assessment. The experimental results show fine-tuned Arabic BERT models outperform Word2Vec based models, and that MARBERT outperforms both ARABERT and CAMeLBERT across all deep learning architectures, highlighting its superior ability to classify Arabic text. Additionally, BLSTM models show the highest performance on ARABERT, MARBERT, and CAMeLBERT, achieving an accuracy of 0.9945 with MARBERT.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207