REVIEW 3 cited by
Open-Source LLMs for Text Annotation: A Practical Guide for Model Setting and Fine-Tuning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
This paper studies the performance of open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) in text classification tasks typical for political science research. By examining tasks like stance, topic, and relevance classification, we aim to guide scholars in making informed decisions about their use of LLMs for text analysis. Specifically, we conduct an assessment of both zero-shot and fine-tuned LLMs across a range of text annotation tasks using news articles and tweets datasets. Our analysis shows that fine-tuning improves the performance of open-source LLMs, allowing them to match or even surpass zero-shot GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, though still lagging behind fine-tuned GPT-3.5. We further establish that fine-tuning is preferable to few-shot training with a relatively modest quantity of annotated text. Our findings show that fine-tuned open-source LLMs can be effectively deployed in a broad spectrum of text annotation applications. We provide a Python notebook facilitating the application of LLMs in text annotation for other researchers.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Evaluating Large Language Models as Expert Annotators
Material Fingerprinting recovers the form and parameters of hyperelastic material models by nearest-neighbor matching of test data against a simulated fingerprint database: exact at zero noise, degrading under 5% noise.
-
ACD-CLIP: Decoupling Representation and Dynamic Fusion for Zero-Shot Anomaly Detection
ACD-CLIP improves zero-shot anomaly detection by co-designing a convolutional low-rank adapter with a dynamic fusion gateway that modulates text prompts from visual context.
-
Reliable Annotations with Less Effort: Evaluating LLM-Human Collaboration in Search Clarifications
LLMs alone annotate search clarifications unreliably; adding confidence-based selective human review cuts effort 24-45% in simulation, but the evaluation is partly built from the ground truth it predicts.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.