Pith. sign in

Paper Citation Record · LEDGER

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language

As of 9 August 2026, this Paper Citation Record lists 15 of 15 outbound references and 0 inbound Pith citation observations for arXiv:2607.28119.

A citation records a reference. It does not transfer a finding from one paper to another.

pith.paper-citation-record.v1
2607.28119 v1

Coverage vector

measured 15 of 15 reference resolution

Typed states for the displayed outbound observations.

Source: paper_references, paper_reference_links, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.313320Z

measured 15 of 15 standing notices

One-hop event checks from named stored sources.

Source: scholarly_work_events, retraction_status_cache, observed 2026-08-09T06:31:02.800959+00:00

measured 0 of 0 inbound itemization

Pith citing papers itemized under the disclosed page cap.

Source: paper_references, paper_reference_links

measured 0 of 1 external citation measurements

A source-named dated measurement, never combined with another source.

Source: cited_works

Reference resolution

15 of 15 outbound references displayed

  • verified exact0
  • verified fuzzy0
  • unresolved15
  • parse uncertain0
  • malformed identifier0
  • metadata mismatch0

External citation measurements

No source-named external measurement is stored.

Outbound references

Observation c2ce3e2c-fa2b-43a9-96fe-a99b1132b445 · outbound

This paper cites an unresolved cited work.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Unresolved cited work

Reference 1

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.283409Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.283409Z digest=sha256:bf31b0128445c0130982955714c6691d326640f04337b8bce931d8f4fd9e83ad

Observation 7ccf8f50-04c8-4739-98c8-47f600cbfa9a · outbound

This paper cites For version 1 prompt, ambiguity is avoided.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language For version 1 prompt, ambiguity is avoided

Reference 2

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.290624Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.290624Z digest=sha256:44b921c2bebd85759212f8d1e48f5fa90db932257879a2bd5417c1a104048604

Observation 681268cd-b67b-4164-9780-8d920e151a25 · outbound

This paper cites Section 7 concludes, and Section 8 contains a discussion of problematic issues and limitations, as well as the following steps.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Section 7 concludes, and Section 8 contains a discussion of problematic issues and limitations, as well as the following steps

Reference 3

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.264925Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.264925Z digest=sha256:b8ba3210c763d95d2067463f5cbf43d0bbdca9defee76df1f3f163a70b814666

Observation f72839a6-5313-4741-9265-f79d5b1e7964 · outbound

This paper cites Uncertain.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Uncertain

Reference 4

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.310194Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.310194Z digest=sha256:1553c3cb63a1387f5848bceeff9242a6808f3deecef6a04e53d8d4a36a29f9e9

Observation 2faf6965-545b-4893-912e-29077331913b · outbound

This paper cites Affect was supposed to be used if the sentence expresses feelings or emotions (e.g.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Affect was supposed to be used if the sentence expresses feelings or emotions (e.g

Reference 5

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.280087Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.280087Z digest=sha256:1ec1e409162db731485c316d067a6ad6c24c50bb13a294e552ce7e89e20d67c7

Observation 3d96ba8e-862c-4783-bf6a-7d5f1c257475 · outbound

This paper cites The assistance of ChatGPT 5.0.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language The assistance of ChatGPT 5.0

Reference 6

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.287584Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.287584Z digest=sha256:79cfcd913763ebe1382066c99fa6cf522fd85451eb62832ff517f8378fba49fc

Observation 2f9be6d8-9ee2-4b40-a73c-ec3e338caffa · outbound

This paper cites Do NOT invent extra information [...].

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Do NOT invent extra information [...]

Reference 9

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.293701Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.293701Z digest=sha256:3aac78bbe55106178ccf946373c65f54e02cd27b240b99fc72819806a270dd87

Observation 94e80cd0-9640-4df2-8262-22f5236b354e · outbound

This paper cites Instead, we focus on agreement between humans and LLMs.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Instead, we focus on agreement between humans and LLMs

Reference 10

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.297121Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.297121Z digest=sha256:0d53eacf9a18414c09cce4676fa6f293c4fe8cdfcf22e8a048e6f12bc4bbf830

Observation 565ff6b2-fd29-4c16-a4b2-1e9f71d5d1af · outbound

This paper cites When do you need Chain-of-Thought Prompting for ChatGPT?.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language When do you need Chain-of-Thought Prompting for ChatGPT?

Reference 12

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.303190Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.303190Z digest=sha256:8a0354cff6a13b0298f1cc842b9bb571f497ac0d4725b61eed9b5095d7147579

Observation 8b09dbb4-7dcf-4d5a-88b3-4fb21d90e182 · outbound

This paper cites Despite everything, she stood tall and smiled.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Despite everything, she stood tall and smiled

Reference 15

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.313320Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.313320Z digest=sha256:7be5344e6f5c0c72fab168a9331696b1cfc72a7b48fb18dabd48347b6f92af11

Observation 847c8593-6570-4647-a407-21413b3080b9 · outbound

This paper cites https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223972 Dong, M., & Fang, A.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223972 Dong, M., & Fang, A

Reference 49

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.307002Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.307002Z digest=sha256:c0a8c09b39e4d7084ea2f1defc299458483f6c49acc088ebd344bafa39c5ee2a

Observation 13a32c7c-1628-448d-870c-e5bdab50c7bb · outbound

This paper cites an unresolved cited work.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Unresolved cited work

Reference 1960

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.273330Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.273330Z digest=sha256:a8a69119b202826a527bc5a1e19c01133538d4a12eafb4cf498d033f0f9f997f

Observation 7b5aecc8-7e33-4536-8b31-5d57a672783e · outbound

This paper cites Still, we consider some aspects in the design of the qualitative study as reasons for low agreement.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language Still, we consider some aspects in the design of the qualitative study as reasons for low agreement

Reference 2015

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.300180Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.300180Z digest=sha256:723c6133d057e9242d7bd4f902d79bbdb50c66420f7cacb6ac4ce05707883336

Observation d7796d58-6373-4b96-9f7e-cf9027661d05 · outbound

This paper cites However, difficult examples were discussed in class together.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language However, difficult examples were discussed in class together

Reference 2018

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.276667Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.276667Z digest=sha256:297b95c7fe0b6c93428ef90c9392694bad8cce391d2aafe29f7ec09f5ca07424

Observation 9d434f9f-b37b-4bc9-84cd-9e07feedab59 · outbound

This paper cites They reported a mean PABAK agreement score of 0.69.

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language They reported a mean PABAK agreement score of 0.69

Reference 2022

Resolution
unresolved
no resolver link, observed 2026-07-31T17:19:08.269517Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

Unavailable: canonical work link unavailable.

source=pdf_text observed=2026-07-31T17:19:08.269517Z digest=sha256:5cbf1a418810ecc453ae010c1c1723a397eae3ee125f0a3457a34d6b63477e1d

Pith citing papers

No inbound Pith citation observations are available.