The potential effectiveness of counterspeech as a hate speech mitigation strategy is attracting increasing interest in the NLG research community, particularly towards the task of automatically producing it. However, automatically generated responses often lack the argumentative richness which characterises expert-produced counterspeech. In this work, we focus on two aspects of counterspeech generation to produce more cogent responses. First, by investigating the tension between helpfulness and harmlessness of LLMs, we test whether the presence of safety guardrails hinders the quality of the generations. Secondly, we assess whether attacking a specific component of the hate speech results in a more effective argumentative strategy to fight online hate. By conducting an extensive human and automatic evaluation, we show how the presence of safety guardrails can be detrimental also to a task that inherently aims at fostering positive social interactions. Moreover, our results show that at...

Is Safer Better? The Impact of Guardrails on the Argumentative Strength of LLMs in Hate Speech Countering / Bonaldi, Helena; Damo, Greta; Ocampo, Nicolás Benjamín; Cabrio, Elena; Villata, Serena; Guerini, Marco. - (2024), pp. 3446-3463. ( 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2024 Miami, Florida, USA 12-16 November) [10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.201].

Is Safer Better? The Impact of Guardrails on the Argumentative Strength of LLMs in Hate Speech Countering

Bonaldi, Helena;Cabrio, Elena;Guerini, Marco
2024-01-01

Abstract

The potential effectiveness of counterspeech as a hate speech mitigation strategy is attracting increasing interest in the NLG research community, particularly towards the task of automatically producing it. However, automatically generated responses often lack the argumentative richness which characterises expert-produced counterspeech. In this work, we focus on two aspects of counterspeech generation to produce more cogent responses. First, by investigating the tension between helpfulness and harmlessness of LLMs, we test whether the presence of safety guardrails hinders the quality of the generations. Secondly, we assess whether attacking a specific component of the hate speech results in a more effective argumentative strategy to fight online hate. By conducting an extensive human and automatic evaluation, we show how the presence of safety guardrails can be detrimental also to a task that inherently aims at fostering positive social interactions. Moreover, our results show that at...
2024
Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
209 N. Eighth Street, Stroudsburg PA 18360, USA
Association for Computational Linguistics
9798891761643
Bonaldi, Helena; Damo, Greta; Ocampo, Nicolás Benjamín; Cabrio, Elena; Villata, Serena; Guerini, Marco
Is Safer Better? The Impact of Guardrails on the Argumentative Strength of LLMs in Hate Speech Countering / Bonaldi, Helena; Damo, Greta; Ocampo, Nicolás Benjamín; Cabrio, Elena; Villata, Serena; Guerini, Marco. - (2024), pp. 3446-3463. ( 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2024 Miami, Florida, USA 12-16 November) [10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.201].
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/445951
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact