Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Brage Eilertsen

dblp:421/7262 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 70% Information extraction and text analysis · 30%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › abusive language detection
hate speech detection
1.012026
Aligning Attention with Human Rationales for Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection · AAAI 2026
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
1.012026
Aligning Attention with Human Rationales for Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection · AAAI 2026
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › explainable AI
self-interpretable models
1.012026
Aligning Attention with Human Rationales for Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection · AAAI 2026
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.312026
Aligning Attention with Human Rationales for Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection · AAAI 2026

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

transformer · 1.0supervised attention · 1.0rationale alignment · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Aligning Attention with Human Rationales for Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection
abstract
The opaque nature of deep learning models presents significant challenges for the ethical deployment of hate speech detection systems. To address this limitation, we introduce Supervised Rational Attention (SRA), a framework that explicitly aligns model attention with human rationales, improving both interpretability and fairness in hate speech classification. SRA integrates a supervised attention mechanism into transformer-based classifiers, optimizing a joint objective that combines standard classification loss with an alignment loss term that minimizes the discrepancy between attention weights and human-annotated rationales. We evaluated SRA on hate speech benchmarks in English (HateXplain) and Portuguese (HateBRXplain) with rationale annotations. Empirically, SRA achieves 2.4× better explainability compared to current baselines, and produces token-level explanations that are more faithful and human-aligned. In terms of fairness, SRA achieves competitive fairness across all measures, with second-best performance in detecting toxic posts targeting identity groups, while maintaining comparable results on other metrics. These findings demonstrate that incorporating human rationales into attention mechanisms can enhance interpretability and faithfulness without compromising fairness.
Brage Eilertsen, Røskva Bjørgfinsdóttir, Francielle Alves Vargas, Ali Ramezani-Kebrya
AAAI1