Metamorphic Testing for Audio Content Moderation Software
September 29, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Conference on Automated Software Engineering
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Wenxuan Wang, Yongjiang Wu, Junyuan Zhang, Shuqing Li, Yun Peng, Wenting Chen, Shuai Wang, Michael R. Lyu
arXiv ID
2509.24215
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Cross-listed
cs.AI,
cs.CL,
cs.MM
Citations
0
Venue
International Conference on Automated Software Engineering
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
The rapid growth of audio-centric platforms and applications such as WhatsApp and Twitter has transformed the way people communicate and share audio content in modern society. However, these platforms are increasingly misused to disseminate harmful audio content, such as hate speech, deceptive advertisements, and explicit material, which can have significant negative consequences (e.g., detrimental effects on mental health). In response, researchers and practitioners have been actively developing and deploying audio content moderation tools to tackle this issue. Despite these efforts, malicious actors can bypass moderation systems by making subtle alterations to audio content, such as modifying pitch or inserting noise. Moreover, the effectiveness of modern audio moderation tools against such adversarial inputs remains insufficiently studied. To address these challenges, we propose MTAM, a Metamorphic Testing framework for Audio content Moderation software. Specifically, we conduct a pilot study on 2000 audio clips and define 14 metamorphic relations across two perturbation categories: Audio Features-Based and Heuristic perturbations. MTAM applies these metamorphic relations to toxic audio content to generate test cases that remain harmful while being more likely to evade detection. In our evaluation, we employ MTAM to test five commercial textual content moderation software and an academic model against three kinds of toxic content. The results show that MTAM achieves up to 38.6%, 18.3%, 35.1%, 16.7%, and 51.1% error finding rates (EFR) when testing commercial moderation software provided by Gladia, Assembly AI, Baidu, Nextdata, and Tencent, respectively, and it obtains up to 45.7% EFR when testing the state-of-the-art algorithms from the academy.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow
π
π
The Cartographer
A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalness
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platforms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contracts
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ContractFuzzer: Fuzzing Smart Contracts for Vulnerability Detection
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted