REVIEW 3 cited by
Sentiment Analysis through LLM Negotiations
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
A standard paradigm for sentiment analysis is to rely on a singular LLM and makes the decision in a single round under the framework of in-context learning. This framework suffers the key disadvantage that the single-turn output generated by a single LLM might not deliver the perfect decision, just as humans sometimes need multiple attempts to get things right. This is especially true for the task of sentiment analysis where deep reasoning is required to address the complex linguistic phenomenon (e.g., clause composition, irony, etc) in the input. To address this issue, this paper introduces a multi-LLM negotiation framework for sentiment analysis. The framework consists of a reasoning-infused generator to provide decision along with rationale, a explanation-deriving discriminator to evaluate the credibility of the generator. The generator and the discriminator iterate until a consensus is reached. The proposed framework naturally addressed the aforementioned challenge, as we are able to take the complementary abilities of two LLMs, have them use rationale to persuade each other for correction. Experiments on a wide range of sentiment analysis benchmarks (SST-2, Movie Review, Twitter, yelp, amazon, IMDB) demonstrate the effectiveness of proposed approach: it consistently yields better performances than the ICL baseline across all benchmarks, and even superior performances to supervised baselines on the Twitter and movie review datasets.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Beyond a Joke: Multi-Angle Reasoning for Detecting and Explaining Harmful Humor in Memes
MAR-12 improves humor and hate detection in memes by prompting a VLM through twelve reasoning perspectives, attention-weighting them, and generating explanations from the weighted evidence.
-
Evaluating Apple Intelligence's Writing Tools for Privacy Against Large Language Model-Based Inference Attacks: Insights from Early Datasets
Apple Intelligence's Friendly and Professional text rewrites can substantially reduce LLM-based emotion inference accuracy in small early datasets.
-
An evaluation of LLMs for generating movie reviews: GPT-4o, Gemini-2.0 and DeepSeek-V3
LLMs can produce fluent movie reviews that readers often mistake for human-written ones, but the models differ in emotional balance and depth.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.