Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

The Effectiveness of LLMs as Annotators: A Comparative Overview and Empirical Analysis of Direct Representation

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 2405.01299 v2 pith:CRCGTBEB submitted 2024-05-02 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
keywords studiesanalysisdatalanguagellmsacrossannotationcomparative
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful support tools across various natural language tasks and a range of application domains. Recent studies focus on exploring their capabilities for data annotation. This paper provides a comparative overview of twelve studies investigating the potential of LLMs in labelling data. While the models demonstrate promising cost and time-saving benefits, there exist considerable limitations, such as representativeness, bias, sensitivity to prompt variations and English language preference. Leveraging insights from these studies, our empirical analysis further examines the alignment between human and GPT-generated opinion distributions across four subjective datasets. In contrast to the studies examining representation, our methodology directly obtains the opinion distribution from GPT. Our analysis thereby supports the minority of studies that are considering diverse perspectives when evaluating data annotation tasks and highlights the need for further research in this direction.

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. Delving into Instance-Dependent Label Noise in Graph Data: A Comprehensive Study and Benchmark

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    BeGIN provides 10 graph datasets with six label-noise types and a broad evaluation, showing that LLM-simulated noise hurts GNNs more than uniform or pairwise noise.

Pith tools