Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 5, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Industrial content moderation must process massive message streams under tight latency constraints, yet most abusive language (AL) detection systems rely on sentence-level classification (ALC), which neither localizes abusive spans nor identifies who is targeted. We define Abusive Language Identification (ALI) as a sequence-labeling task that jointly extracts AL spans and target mentions, and assess whether this approach can be used for text moderation. On a pilot corpus drawn from a production moderation pipeline, we compare ALI with ALC on cross-domain generalization and implicit abuse, and we also evaluate AL and target span detection. ALI remains competitive with ALC while providing localized outputs for moderators, with a modest and configuration-sensitive advantage on implicit abuse. Exact AL boundaries and target spans remain difficult to recover. We complement this comparison with a qualitative analysis and discuss perspectives on complete target--span linking and on structured benchmarks for ALI.