Research in toxicity detection in natural language processing for the speech modality (audio-based) is quite limited, particularly for languages other than English. To address these limitations and lay the groundwork for truly multilingual audio-based toxicity detection, we introduce MuTox, the first highly multilingual audio-based dataset with toxicity labels which covers 14 different linguistic families. The dataset comprises 20,000 audio utterances for English and Spanish, and 4,000 for the other 28 languages. To demonstrate the quality of this dataset, we trained the MuTox audio-based toxicity classifier, which enables zero-shot toxicity detection across a wide range of languages. This classifier performs on par with existing text-based trainable classifiers, while expanding the language coverage more than tenfold. When compared to a wordlist-based classifier that covers a similar number of languages, MuTox improves F1-Score by an average of 100%. This significant improvement underscores the potential of MuTox in advancing the field of audio-based toxicity detection.

We introduce a multilingual extension of the HolisticBias dataset, the largest English template-based taxonomy of textual people references: Multilingual HolisticBias. This extension consists of 20,459 sentences in 50 languages distributed across 13 demographic axes. Source sentences are built from combinations of 118 demographic descriptors and three patterns, excluding nonsensical combinations. Multilingual translations include alternatives for gendered languages that cover gendered translations when there is ambiguity in English. Our dataset is intended to uncover demographic imbalances and be the tool to quantify mitigations towards them. Our initial findings show that translation quality for EN-to-XX translations is an average of almost 8 spBLEU better when evaluating with the masculine human reference compared to feminine. In the opposite direction, XX-to-EN, we compare the robustness of the model when the source input only differs in gender (masculine or feminine) and masculine translations are an average of almost 4 spBLEU better than feminine. When embedding sentences to a joint multilingual sentence representations space, we find that for most languages masculine translations are significantly closer to the English neutral sentences when embedded.