Pith. sign in

Moore, Daniel M

10 Pith papers cite this work, alongside 35 external citations. Polarity classification is still indexing.

10 Pith papers citing it
35 external citations · Pith
abstract

Generative large language models (LLMs) can be a powerful tool for augmenting text annotation procedures, but their performance varies across annotation tasks due to prompt quality, text data idiosyncrasies, and conceptual difficulty. Because these challenges will persist even as LLM technology improves, we argue that any automated annotation process using an LLM must validate the LLM's performance against labels generated by humans. To this end, we outline a workflow to harness the annotation potential of LLMs in a principled, efficient way. Using GPT-4, we validate this approach by replicating 27 annotation tasks across 11 datasets from recent social science articles in high-impact journals. We find that LLM performance for text annotation is promising but highly contingent on both the dataset and the type of annotation task, which reinforces the necessity to validate on a task-by-task basis. We make available easy-to-use software designed to implement our workflow and streamline the deployment of LLMs for automated annotation.

citation-role summary

background 2

citation-polarity summary

years

2026 9 2025 1

roles

background 1

polarities

background 1

representative citing papers

Talking Politics with Artificial Intelligence

econ.GN · 2026-07-01 · unverdicted · novelty 5.0

Political content appears in 3.9% of AI conversations, mostly for information and drafting rather than opinions, with U.S. users showing increased stance-taking and affect after the 2024 election result call.

citing papers explorer

Showing 10 of 10 citing papers.