Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Can Large Language Models Address Open-Target Stance Detection?

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

arxiv 2409.00222 v7 pith:FYQ4JMVP submitted 2024-08-30 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords targetdetectionstancellmsgenerationexplicitexplicitlylanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Stance detection (SD) identifies the text position towards a target, typically labeled as favor, against, or none. We introduce Open-Target Stance Detection (OTSD), the most realistic task where targets are neither seen during training nor provided as input. We evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) from GPT, Gemini, Llama, and Mistral families, comparing their performance to the only existing work, Target-Stance Extraction (TSE), which benefits from predefined targets. Unlike TSE, OTSD removes the dependency of a predefined list, making target generation and evaluation more challenging. We also provide a metric for evaluating target quality that correlates well with human judgment. Our experiments reveal that LLMs outperform TSE in target generation, both when the real target is explicitly and not explicitly mentioned in the text. Similarly, LLMs overall surpass TSE in stance detection for both explicit and non-explicit cases. However, LLMs struggle in both target generation and stance detection when the target is not explicit.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Finding Common Ground: Using Large Language Models to Detect Agreement in Multi-Agent Decision Conferences

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLM agents can run a simulated decision conference, and a dedicated agreement-detection agent helps the debate cover topics that match a real expert workshop.

Pith tools