Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science

Alex Qian; Bolin Shen; Catherine Chen; Chenxiao Yu; Emilio Ferrara; Fangzhou Mu; Fred Gui; Furong Huang; Hanjie Chen; Hongjia Yang

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper presents the first principled framework, termed Political-LLM, for organizing how large language models are being integrated into computational political science, and supports it with a voting-simulation case study.

desk verdict A useful but overclaimed survey with a genuinely helpful taxonomy, undermined by internal inconsistencies in the generative/simulation split and an underpowered case study. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06864 v1 pith:KFTUQTWG submitted 2024-12-09 cs.CL cs.AI

Lincan Li , Jiaqi Li , Catherine Chen , Fred Gui , Hongjia Yang , Chenxiao Yu , Zhengguang Wang , Jianing Cai

show 39 more authors

Junlong Aaron Zhou Bolin Shen Alex Qian Weixin Chen Zhongkai Xue Lichao Sun Lifang He Hanjie Chen Kaize Ding Zijian Du Fangzhou Mu Jiaxin Pei Jieyu Zhao Swabha Swayamdipta Willie Neiswanger Hua Wei Xiyang Hu Shixiang Zhu Tianlong Chen Yingzhou Lu Yang Shi Lianhui Qin Tianfan Fu Zhengzhong Tu Yuzhe Yang Jaemin Yoo Jiaheng Zhang Ryan Rossi Liang Zhan Liang Zhao Emilio Ferrara Yan Liu Furong Huang Xiangliang Zhang Lawrence Rothenberg Shuiwang Ji Philip S. Yu Yue Zhao Yushun Dong

This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CLcs.AI

keywords largelanguagemodelspoliticalsciencetaxonomycomputationalelectionpredictionbiasvotingsimulationsurvey

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that research on large language models in political science has grown rapidly but lacks a shared structure, so it proposes the first principled framework, "Political-LLM," to organize the field. The framework classifies work from two directions: the political science functions LLMs can serve (prediction, generation, simulation, causal inference, and societal impact) and the computational methods needed to adapt LLMs to political contexts (datasets, fine-tuning, inference, evaluation). The paper argues that this taxonomy reveals what is missing and where the field should go, such as domain-specific datasets and new evaluation criteria. A case study on the 2016 ANES data adds that larger LLMs reproduce the real Republican-to-Democrat vote ratio near 47.7 percent, while smaller models skew toward the winning party and depend on generated political features to stay unbiased.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the taxonomy itself: a two-axis classification of LLM-for-political-science work, with "Classical Political Science Function & Modern Transformation" on one side and "Tech Foundation for LLM Adaptations in Political Science" on the other. Its operational distinction is the boundary between generative tasks, which produce new text or synthetic data, and simulation, which models how human actors with motivations and biases would behave; this boundary carries the argument that political science needs simulation and causal-inference categories beyond the usual predictive/generative split. The case study adds a concrete measurement device: the Republican-vote ratio $R/(R+D)$ computed from ANES 2016 personas, compared across model sizes and with and without chain-of-thought-generated ideology features.

What would settle it

A reader could test the taxonomy's claim to comprehensiveness by taking the papers published in the last two years at the intersection of LLMs and political science, having independent coders assign each to the proposed categories, and measuring the fraction that fail to fit or that fall in both generative and simulation at once; if that fraction is substantial (for example, more than one in four), the claim that the taxonomy is principled and comprehensive is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a two-part taxonomy supplies a systematic understanding of LLM integration in political science. From the political side, LLM work splits into predictive tasks (e.g., election forecasting, annotation), generative tasks (e.g., synthetic survey data), simulation of agent behavior, explainability and causal inference, and societal/ethical impacts; from the technical side, it splits into benchmark datasets, data preparation, fine-tuning, zero/few-shot inference, and auxiliary techniques such as retrieval-augmented generation and knowledge editing. The paper distinguishes simulation from generation by whether the model emulates human cognition and behavior. It further contends, on the basis of its case study, that model scale and the presence of political features jointly determine voting-simulation bias: GPT-4o and Llama 3.1-70B match the ANES 2016 baseline, while GPT-4o-mini and Llama 3.1-8B skew toward the 2016 winner unless political ideology features are generated and supplied.

Load-bearing premise

The framework's usefulness rests on the assumption that the literature on LLMs in political science can be cleanly and exhaustively divided into the two sets of categories, with no significant overlap or unclassifiable work.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Researchers can use the Political-LLM taxonomy to locate their work and identify which LLM techniques are transferable to their task.
The generative/simulation distinction gives political scientists a criterion for choosing between producing synthetic data and modeling behavioral dynamics.
The case study implies that when using LLMs for voting simulation, model scale and the inclusion of political features should be reported and controlled, since both affect partisan skew.
The framework's list of evaluation gaps argues for new metrics beyond accuracy, F1, and BLEU that capture policy relevance and fairness.
The survey's map of techniques, such as RAG and knowledge editing, provides a starting menu for adapting general LLMs to political contexts.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The taxonomy's clean boundary between generative and simulation tasks is likely to blur in practice, since many agent simulations also generate synthetic data; future taxonomies may need a continuum or overlapping categories rather than a partition.
The case study's contrast of large versus small models suggests that political-bias results in existing literature may be confounded by model scale, so scale should be treated as a covariate in comparisons.
The framework is stated for political science but its two-axis structure—domain functions versus technical methods—appears transferable to other social-science fields, such as sociology or economics.
A test of the claim to be 'principled' could compare the taxonomy's categories against a new, systematic corpus of papers: if a substantial share cannot be classified or needs multiple categories, the taxonomy would require revision.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is a survey of LLMs in political science with a proposed taxonomy and a small case study. The taxonomy is genuinely useful as a first-pass organizational scheme, and the literature coverage is broad. The case study comparing GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, Llama 3.1-8B and 70B on ANES 2016 voting simulation is a concrete addition, and the main finding—larger models track the ground truth ratio near 47.7% while smaller models skew—is plausible and consistent with prior work.

The soft spots are real and they matter. The 'first principled framework' claim is overstated given prior surveys with similar organizational ambitions. More importantly, the taxonomy applies its own generative/simulation boundary inconsistently. The paper defines generative tasks as producing content without emulating human cognitive processes, and simulation as mimicking human actors or groups. But Section 4.2 files Argyle et al. and Bisbee et al., which the paper itself describes as simulating human survey responses, under generative tasks. That is an internal misapplication, not just a boundary dispute. Section 3 also says the computational branch has five components but lists six, and the 'more than 300% increase' statistic in the introduction is unsourced.

The case study reports single-run ratios without confidence intervals or statistical tests, so the quantitative claims are weaker than they look. I would trust the directional findings because they are backed by prior work, but not the precise percentages.

Who is this for? Researchers who want a broad map of the field will get value from the references and the organizational structure. But it should not be used as a reliable guidebook until the taxonomy is cleaned up and the empirical claims are given proper statistical support.

My recommendation: send it to peer review. It deserves a serious referee and a request for heavy revision, not a desk reject. The taxonomic inconsistencies are fixable, and the survey fills a real gap.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This survey proposes a taxonomy, 'Political-LLM', for organizing research on large language models in political science. The taxonomy divides the field into political-science functions (predictive tasks, generative tasks, simulation, explainability/causal inference, and social/ethical impacts) and computational approaches (benchmark datasets, data processing, fine-tuning, zero/few-shot inference, other inference techniques, and a voting-simulation case study). The paper reviews the literature, catalogs benchmark datasets, discusses technical methods, and reports an empirical case study in which four LLMs simulate voting behavior on the 2016 ANES dataset. The abstract and introduction claim this is 'the first principled framework' for the field.

Significance. If the taxonomy were made internally consistent and the case study properly quantified, this survey would be a useful interdisciplinary resource. Its strengths are broad coverage of recent work, a comparative table against prior surveys (Table 1), a substantial benchmark catalog (Table 3), and an case study anchored to an external benchmark (ANES 2016) rather than only to model self-reports. The secondary empirical claim that larger models reproduce the 47.7% vote ratio while smaller models skew toward the winning party is interesting, but it is currently under-supported by the reported statistics.

major comments (4)

[Sections 3, 4.2, 4.3; Table 2] The central taxonomy's generative/simulation boundary is not applied consistently with the paper's own definitions. Section 4 defines generative tasks as producing new content without emulating human cognitive processes, and simulation as mimicking how human actors or groups would react given motivations, biases, and contextual influences. Yet Section 4.2 presents Argyle et al. [21] as showing that LLMs 'can simulate human responses, mimicking the distribution of survey data across demographic groups' and Bisbee et al. [142] as using LLM-generated data to 'replicate survey responses, simulating various public opinion trends.' These are simulation-style activities under the paper's own criterion, and Table 2's application examples for generative tasks ('Synthetic survey data, opinion generation') reinforce the ambiguity. Because the taxonomy is the paper's primary claimed contribution, this inconsistency must be resolved by either redefining the boundary or moving these works to Section 4.3.
[Section 3, Figure 2] The description of the computational branch states that it 'consists of five components' but immediately lists six: Benchmark Datasets, Data Processing, Fine-Tuning, Zero/Few-Shot Inference, Other Inference Techniques, and Case Study on Voting Simulation. Moreover, the Case Study is the authors' own experiment (Section 5.7), not a category of existing published literature; including it as a taxonomy node is inconsistent with the claim that the taxonomy classifies the literature in a principled and exhaustive way. The count and the node structure should be corrected, and the case study should be presented as an application of the framework rather than as a taxonomy component.
[Section 5.7.3, Figure 8] The case-study conclusions are based on single point estimates of R/(R+D) for each model and pipeline, with no confidence intervals, no repeated decoding runs, and no statistical comparison to the ANES 2016 benchmark ratio of 0.477. Statements such as GPT-4o displaying a 'significant skew' when political features are removed, or GPT-4o-mini showing a 'pronounced skew' toward the winning party, require uncertainty quantification; single-run ratios such as 70.26% versus 66.38% may be within sampling noise. I recommend reporting repeated-seed or bootstrap intervals and a formal comparison before drawing conclusions about model scale and the effect of chain-of-thought feature generation.
[Abstract, Section 1, Table 1] The claim that Political-LLM is the 'first principled framework' is asserted rather than demonstrated. The paper does not define what makes a framework 'principled,' and Table 1 only records the presence or absence of survey features; it does not show that earlier frameworks lack a principled basis or that the proposed categories are mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive. To make this claim load-bearing, the paper should state an explicit criterion for 'principled' and show that previous surveys fail it, or the claim should be softened to 'a systematic taxonomy.'

minor comments (4)

[Section 1] The claim of 'more than 300% increase in publications' related to LLMs and political science between 2020 and 2024 has no citation, database, search string, or retrieval date; as written it is not verifiable and should either be documented or removed.
[Table 3 and Section 5.3] BillSum is cited as [191] in Table 3 but as [220] in Section 5.3; please reconcile the reference numbering.
[Figure 2] Several branch labels do not match the section names, for example 'Explanation Theory' versus 'LLM Explainability and Causal Inference' (Section 4.4) and 'Ethical Consideration & Fairness' versus 'Ethical Concerns in LLM Development and Deployment' (Section 4.5); the figure labels should be aligned with the text.
[Section 5.7.3, Figure 9] The feature-generation matrices are described as 7x7, but the figure does not state the units, the response-frequency threshold for circle size, or the number of observations per cell; please add a complete legend and report cell counts.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the survey taxonomy and the ANES case study are anchored to external benchmarks and literature, with no fitted parameter fed back into a claimed prediction.

full rationale

This paper is a literature survey plus an empirical case study, not a derivation. The central contribution is a proposed taxonomy (Section 3, Figure 2) classifying existing LLM-for-political-science work; the taxonomy is asserted as an organizing scheme rather than derived from a hidden assumption equal to its conclusion. The case study in Section 5.7 is benchmarked against the external ANES 2016 dataset: the reported ratio R/(R+D) is compared with the ground-truth 47.7% from ANES, and the LLMs' generated ideology features are compared with the original ANES labels. No parameter is fitted to the target ratio, and the generation pipelines withhold the original ideology label before generating it, so the comparison is not forced by construction. Self-citations appear in the references (e.g., healthcare and simulation papers by co-authors), but they support general background statements and are not load-bearing for the taxonomy or the case study. The paper does contain internal inconsistencies, such as Section 3 saying the computational branch has five components while listing six, and Section 4.2 filing human-response simulation work under generative tasks despite the Section 4 simulation definition, but these are classification-reliability concerns rather than circular reductions. Accordingly, no significant circularity is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim (a comprehensive taxonomy) rests on the domain assumptions listed. The case study relies on the assumption that LLM-simulated voting is a valid proxy for human voting. No free parameters or invented entities were introduced, since the paper's contribution is organizational rather than a new physical or mathematical model.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption LLM-simulated voting behavior, when prompted with personas, can be compared directly to human survey responses via the ratio R/(R+D).
Used in Section 5.7.2, Evaluation Criteria. The validity of the case study's bias measurement rests on this proxy being meaningful.
domain assumption The 2016 ANES Time Series Study provides a reliable ground truth for party identification and ideology.
Section 5.7.1 dataset selection; the paper treats ANES 2016 as ground truth for evaluating LLM simulations.
ad hoc to paper The taxonomy categories are mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive for the current literature.
Section 3 introduces the taxonomy as a comprehensive framework, but it is constructed from the authors' reading of the literature without formal validation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KFTUQTWG

@misc{pith2026241206864,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KFTUQTWG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06864}
}

read the original abstract

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in political science tasks such as election prediction, sentiment analysis, policy impact assessment, and misinformation detection. Meanwhile, the need to systematically understand how LLMs can further revolutionize the field also becomes urgent. In this work, we--a multidisciplinary team of researchers spanning computer science and political science--present the first principled framework termed Political-LLM to advance the comprehensive understanding of integrating LLMs into computational political science. Specifically, we first introduce a fundamental taxonomy classifying the existing explorations into two perspectives: political science and computational methodologies. In particular, from the political science perspective, we highlight the role of LLMs in automating predictive and generative tasks, simulating behavior dynamics, and improving causal inference through tools like counterfactual generation; from a computational perspective, we introduce advancements in data preparation, fine-tuning, and evaluation methods for LLMs that are tailored to political contexts. We identify key challenges and future directions, emphasizing the development of domain-specific datasets, addressing issues of bias and fairness, incorporating human expertise, and redefining evaluation criteria to align with the unique requirements of computational political science. Political-LLM seeks to serve as a guidebook for researchers to foster an informed, ethical, and impactful use of Artificial Intelligence in political science. Our online resource is available at: http://political-llm.org/.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06864 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** LLMs are revolutionizing political science through advanced language analysis and interdisciplinary integration capabilities. Recent years have witnessed the extraordinary capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their contributions to a plethora of fields, such as healthcare [1, 2, 3, 4], finance [5, 6, 7], scientific discoveries [8, 9, 10], transportation [11, 12, 13, 14], and education [15, 16, 17],… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The proposed Taxonomy on LLM for Political Science. focusing on prompt engineering and example selection. Finally, Other Inference Techniques (section 5.6) such as retrieval-augmented generation [94], chain-of-thought reasoning [265], knowledge editing [266], and self-consistency decoding [250] enhance the adaptability of LLMs for nuanced political tasks. Together, these computational approaches construct a robust f… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The workflow of LLM-based automated predictive task, using the U.S. Presidential Election prediction as an example. LLM-based Advancements. To better illustrate the workflow of LLMs in predictive tasks, we provide a diagram showcasing the U.S. Presidential Election outcome prediction as an example. This example highlights how LLMs integrate diverse data sources, process them into structured representations, and gen… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Workflow for LLM-based generative tasks, illustrating the synthesis of political speeches with specific ideology, style, and focus of content. LLMs also play a critical role in estimating political ideologies in situations where conventional data sources, such as votin…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Illustration of the OpinionQA dataset preparation on publicly available data source. We elaborate the developing process of OpinionQA dataset in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Dataset annotation approaches, including traditional manual approach, semi-automated approach, and LLM-based fully automated approach. Annotation Strategies. Annotation is another essential aspect of dataset preparation. Datasets intended for political sentiment anal…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Illustration of retrieval-augmented generation techniques on U.S. Presidential Election analysis. Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning is a technique that guides LLMs through a step-by-step logical reasoning process, allowing the model to handle …

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: The "base" labels represent the simulation results of different models using the complete ANES dataset features, while the "gen" labels represent results obtained by generating political ideology through the Chain of Thought approach and subsequently using the generate…

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: The figure contains four 7x7 feature comparison matrices, corresponding illustrative diagrams, and four pie charts to evaluate the quality of feature generation by different LLMs in the field of political science. 33 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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

A Survey on Proactive Defense Strategies Against Misinformation in Large Language Models
cs.IR 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

A survey claims proactive defenses against LLM misinformation outperform post-hoc detection by up to 63%, but no meta-analysis details are provided to support the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

293 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[21]

Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples

Lisa P Argyle, Ethan C Busby, Nancy Fulda, Joshua R Gubler, Christopher Rytting, and David Wingate. Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples. PoliticalAnalysis,31(3):337–351, 2023

2023
[142]

Synthetic replacements for human survey data? the perils of large language models.Political Analysis, pages 1–16, 2024

James Bisbee, Joshua D Clinton, Cassy Dorff, Brenton Kenkel, and Jennifer M Larson. Synthetic replacements for human survey data? the perils of large language models.Political Analysis, pages 1–16, 2024

2024
[1]

Theshakyfoundationsoflargelanguagemodelsandfoundation models for electronic health records.npj Digital Medicine, 6(1):135, 2023

Michael Wornow, Yizhe Xu, Rahul Thapa, Birju Patel, Ethan Steinberg, Scott Fleming, Michael A Pfeffer,JasonFries,andNigamHShah. Theshakyfoundationsoflargelanguagemodelsandfoundation models for electronic health records.npj Digital Medicine, 6(1):135, 2023

2023
[2]

Are large language models ready for healthcare? a comparative study on clinical language understanding

Yuqing Wang, Yun Zhao, and Linda Petzold. Are large language models ready for healthcare? a comparative study on clinical language understanding. InMachine Learning for Healthcare Conference, pages 804–823. PMLR, 2023

2023
[3]

Retrieval-reasoning large language model-based synthetic clinical trial generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12476, 2024

Zerui Xu, Fang Wu, Tianfan Fu, and Yue Zhao. Retrieval-reasoning large language model-based synthetic clinical trial generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12476, 2024

arXiv 2024
[4]

Clinicalagent: Clinical trial multi-agent with large language model-based reasoning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14777, 2024

Ling Yue, Sixue Xing, Jintai Chen, and Tianfan Fu. Clinicalagent: Clinical trial multi-agent with large language model-based reasoning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14777, 2024. 38 Political-LLM

arXiv 2024
[5]

Finbert: A large language model for extracting information from financial text.Contemporary Accounting Research, 40(2):806–841, 2023

Allen H Huang, Hui Wang, and Yi Yang. Finbert: A large language model for extracting information from financial text.Contemporary Accounting Research, 40(2):806–841, 2023

2023
[6]

Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance

Shĳie Wu, Ozan Irsoy, Steven Lu, Vadim Dabravolski, Mark Dredze, Sebastian Gehrmann, Prabhanjan Kambadur, David Rosenberg, and Gideon Mann. Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564, 2023

arXiv 2023

Show all 293 references

[7]

Pixiu: A comprehensive benchmark, instruction dataset and large language model for finance

Qianqian Xie, Weiguang Han, Xiao Zhang, Yanzhao Lai, Min Peng, Alejandro Lopez-Lira, and Jimin Huang. Pixiu: A comprehensive benchmark, instruction dataset and large language model for finance. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024

2024
[8]

Hofgard, Aria Mansouri Tehrani, Rui Wang, Ameya Daigavane, Montgomery Bohde, Jerry Kurtin, Qian Huang, Tuong Phung, Minkai Xu, Chaitanya K

Xuan Zhang, Limei Wang, Jacob Helwig, Youzhi Luo, Cong Fu, Yaochen Xie, Meng Liu, Yuchao Lin, Zhao Xu, Keqiang Yan, Keir Adams, Maurice Weiler, Xiner Li, Tianfan Fu, Yucheng Wang, Haiyang Yu, YuQing Xie, Xiang Fu, Alex Strasser, Shenglong Xu, Yi Liu, Yuanqi Du, Alexandra Saxto...

2023 arXiv
[9]

A comprehensive survey of scientific large language models and their applications in scientific discovery

Yu Zhang, Xiusi Chen, Bowen Jin, Sheng Wang, Shuiwang Ji, Wei Wang, and Jiawei Han. A comprehensive survey of scientific large language models and their applications in scientific discovery. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, page 8783–8817, 2024

2024
[10]

Drugagent: Automating ai-aided drug discovery programming through llm multi-agent collaboration.arXiv, 2024

Sizhe Liu, Yizhou Lu, Siyu Chen, Xiyang Hu, Jieyu Zhao, Tianfan Fu, and Yue Zhao. Drugagent: Automating ai-aided drug discovery programming through llm multi-agent collaboration.arXiv, 2024

2024
[11]

Open-ti: Open traffic intelligence with augmented language model.International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, pages 1–26, 2024

Longchao Da, Kuanru Liou, Tiejin Chen, Xuesong Zhou, Xiangyong Luo, Yezhou Yang, and Hua Wei. Open-ti: Open traffic intelligence with augmented language model.International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, pages 1–26, 2024

2024
[12]

Prompt to transfer: Sim-to-real transfer for traffic signal control with prompt learning

Longchao Da, Minquan Gao, Hao Mei, and Hua Wei. Prompt to transfer: Sim-to-real transfer for traffic signal control with prompt learning. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 82–90, 2024

2024
[13]

Urban foundation models: A survey

Weĳia Zhang, Jindong Han, Zhao Xu, Hang Ni, Hao Liu, and Hui Xiong. Urban foundation models: A survey. InProceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 6633–6643, 2024

2024
[14]

Opencity: Open spatio- temporal foundation models for traffic prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10269, 2024

Zhonghang Li, Long Xia, Lei Shi, Yong Xu, Dawei Yin, and Chao Huang. Opencity: Open spatio- temporal foundation models for traffic prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10269, 2024

2024
[15]

Chatgpt for good? on opportunities and challenges of large language models for education.Learning and individual differences, 103:102274, 2023

Enkelejda Kasneci, Kathrin Seßler, Stefan Küchemann, Maria Bannert, Daryna Dementieva, Frank Fischer, Urs Gasser, Georg Groh, Stephan Günnemann, Eyke Hüllermeier, et al. Chatgpt for good? on opportunities and challenges of large language models for education.Learning and indiv...

2023
[16]

Large language models for education: Grading open-ended questions using chatgpt

GustavoPinto,IsadoraCardoso-Pereira,DaniloMonteiro,DaniloLucena,AlbertoSouza,andKievGama. Large language models for education: Grading open-ended questions using chatgpt. InProceedings of the XXXVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, page 293–302, 2023

2023
[17]

Can large language models make the grade? an empirical study evaluating llms ability to mark short answer questions in k-12 education

Owen Henkel, Libby Hills, Adam Boxer, Bill Roberts, and Zach Levonian. Can large language models make the grade? an empirical study evaluating llms ability to mark short answer questions in k-12 education. InProceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale, pages ...

2024
[18]

Large language models: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06196, 2024

ShervinMinaee,TomasMikolov,NarjesNikzad,MeysamChenaghlu,RichardSocher,XavierAmatriain, and Jianfeng Gao. Large language models: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06196, 2024

2024 arXiv
[19]

A survey of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223, 2023

Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun Zhou, Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Xiaolei Wang, Yupeng Hou, Yingqian Min, Beichen Zhang, Junjie Zhang, Zican Dong, et al. A survey of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223, 2023. 39 Political-LLM

2023 arXiv
[20]

Largelanguagemodels and politicalscience

MitchellLinegar, RafalKocielnik, and R.Michael Alvarez. Largelanguagemodels and politicalscience. Frontiers in Political Science, 5, 2023

2023
[22]

Can large language models transform computational social science?Computational Linguistics, 50(1):237–291, 2024

Caleb Ziems, William Held, Omar Shaikh, Jiaao Chen, Zhehao Zhang, and Diyi Yang. Can large language models transform computational social science?Computational Linguistics, 50(1):237–291, 2024

2024
[23]

Using large language models in psychology.Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(11):688–701, 2023

Dorottya Demszky, Diyi Yang, David S Yeager, Christopher J Bryan, Margarett Clapper, Susannah Chandhok, Johannes C Eichstaedt, Cameron Hecht, Jeremy Jamieson, Meghann Johnson, et al. Using large language models in psychology.Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(11):688–701, 2023

2023
[24]

How artificial intelligence can influence elections: Analyzing the large language models (llms) political bias

George-Cristinel Rotaru, Sorin Anagnoste, and Vasile-Marian Oancea. How artificial intelligence can influence elections: Analyzing the large language models (llms) political bias. InProceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, pages 1882–1891, 2024

2024
[25]

On political theory and large language models.Political Theory, 52(4):548–580, 2024

Emma Rodman. On political theory and large language models.Political Theory, 52(4):548–580, 2024

2024
[26]

Political bias in large language models.The Commons: Puget Sound Journal of Politics, 4(1):2, 2023

Lucas Gover. Political bias in large language models.The Commons: Puget Sound Journal of Politics, 4(1):2, 2023

2023
[27]

Power and political institutions.Perspectives on politics, 3(2):215–233, 2005

Terry M Moe. Power and political institutions.Perspectives on politics, 3(2):215–233, 2005

2005
[28]

Chenxi Gao, Yini Li, et al. Post-war development analysis of political science: from behaviorism to new institutionalism: Political science development trend, challenges and suggestions.International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology, 4(8), 2022

2022
[29]

Large-scale computerized text analysis in political science: Opportunities and challenges.Annual Review of Political Science, 20(1):529–544, 2017

John Wilkerson and Andreu Casas. Large-scale computerized text analysis in political science: Opportunities and challenges.Annual Review of Political Science, 20(1):529–544, 2017

2017
[30]

# election2020: the first public twitter dataset on the 2020 us presidential election.Journal of Computational Social Science, pages 1–18, 2022

Emily Chen, Ashok Deb, and Emilio Ferrara. # election2020: the first public twitter dataset on the 2020 us presidential election.Journal of Computational Social Science, pages 1–18, 2022

2020
[31]

Qualitative methods.Annual Review of Political Science, 20(1):15–36, 2017

John Gerring. Qualitative methods.Annual Review of Political Science, 20(1):15–36, 2017

2017
[32]

Chatgpt-4 outperforms experts and crowd workers in annotating political twitter messages with zero-shot learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06588, 2023

Petter Törnberg. Chatgpt-4 outperforms experts and crowd workers in annotating political twitter messages with zero-shot learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06588, 2023

2023 arXiv
[33]

Large language models as a substitute for human experts in annotating political text.Research & Politics, 11(1):20531680241236239, 2024

Michael Heseltine and Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg. Large language models as a substitute for human experts in annotating political text.Research & Politics, 11(1):20531680241236239, 2024

2024
[34]

Summary of chatgpt-related research and perspective towards the future of large language models.Meta-Radiology, page 100017, 2023

Yiheng Liu, Tianle Han, Siyuan Ma, Jiayue Zhang, Yuanyuan Yang, Jiaming Tian, Hao He, Antong Li, Mengshen He, Zhengliang Liu, et al. Summary of chatgpt-related research and perspective towards the future of large language models.Meta-Radiology, page 100017, 2023

2023
[35]

Secap: Speech emotion captioning with large language model

Yaoxun Xu, Hangting Chen, Jianwei Yu, Qiaochu Huang, Zhiyong Wu, Shi-Xiong Zhang, Guangzhi Li, Yi Luo, and Rongzhi Gu. Secap: Speech emotion captioning with large language model. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 19323–19331, 2024

2024
[36]

Disc-lawllm: Fine-tuning large language models for intelligent legal services.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11325, 2023

Shengbin Yue, Wei Chen, Siyuan Wang, Bingxuan Li, Chenchen Shen, Shujun Liu, Yuxuan Zhou, Yao Xiao, Song Yun, Xuanjing Huang, et al. Disc-lawllm: Fine-tuning large language models for intelligent legal services.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11325, 2023

2023 arXiv
[37]

Llamandement: Large language models for summarization of french legislative proposals.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.16182, 2024

JosephGesnouin,YannisTannier,ChristopheGomesDaSilva,HatimTapory,CamilleBrier,HugoSimon, Raphael Rozenberg, Hermann Woehrel, Mehdi El Yakaabi, Thomas Binder, et al. Llamandement: Large language models for summarization of french legislative proposals.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.1...

2024 arXiv
[38]

Simulating social media using large language models to evaluate alternative news feed algorithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05984, 2023

Petter Törnberg, Diliara Valeeva, Justus Uitermark, and Christopher Bail. Simulating social media using large language models to evaluate alternative news feed algorithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05984, 2023

2023 arXiv
[39]

Turkishbertweet: Fast and reliable large language model for social media analysis

Ali Najafi and Onur Varol. Turkishbertweet: Fast and reliable large language model for social media analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 255:124737, 2024. 40 Political-LLM

2024
[40]

Benchmarking large language models for news summarization.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 12:39–57, 2024

Tianyi Zhang, Faisal Ladhak, Esin Durmus, Percy Liang, Kathleen McKeown, and Tatsunori B Hashimoto. Benchmarking large language models for news summarization.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 12:39–57, 2024

2024
[41]

Bias of ai-generated content: an examination of news produced by large language models.Scientific Reports, 14(1):5224, 2024

Xiao Fang, Shangkun Che, Minjia Mao, Hongzhe Zhang, Ming Zhao, and Xiaohang Zhao. Bias of ai-generated content: an examination of news produced by large language models.Scientific Reports, 14(1):5224, 2024

2024
[42]

The political preferences of llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01789, 2024

David Rozado. The political preferences of llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01789, 2024

2024 arXiv
[43]

The persuasive power of large language models

Simon Martin Breum, Daniel Vædele Egdal, Victor Gram Mortensen, Anders Giovanni Møller, and Luca Maria Aiello. The persuasive power of large language models. InProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 18, pages 152–163, 2024

2024
[44]

Escalation risks from language models in military and diplomatic decision-making

Juan-Pablo Rivera, Gabriel Mukobi, Anka Reuel, Max Lamparth, Chandler Smith, and Jacquelyn Schneider. Escalation risks from language models in military and diplomatic decision-making. InThe 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pages 836–898, 2024

2024
[45]

Can llms help predict elections?(counter) evidence from the world’s largest democracy.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.07828, 2024

Pratik Gujral, Kshitĳ Awaldhi, Navya Jain, Bhavuk Bhandula, and Abhĳnan Chakraborty. Can llms help predict elections?(counter) evidence from the world’s largest democracy.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.07828, 2024

2024 arXiv
[46]

Sentiment analysis in the era of large language models: A reality check.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15005, 2023

Wenxuan Zhang, Yue Deng, Bing Liu, Sinno Jialin Pan, and Lidong Bing. Sentiment analysis in the era of large language models: A reality check.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15005, 2023

2023 arXiv
[47]

From social media to ballot box: Leveraging location-aware sentiment analysis for election predictions.Computers, Materials & Continua, 77(3), 2023

Asif Khan, Nada Boudjellal, Huaping Zhang, Arshad Ahmad, and Maqbool Khan. From social media to ballot box: Leveraging location-aware sentiment analysis for election predictions.Computers, Materials & Continua, 77(3), 2023

2023
[48]

Electionsim: Massive population election simulation powered by large language model driven agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20746, 2024

Xinnong Zhang, Jiayu Lin, Libo Sun, Weihong Qi, Yihang Yang, Yue Chen, Hanjia Lyu, Xinyi Mou, Siming Chen, Jiebo Luo, et al. Electionsim: Massive population election simulation powered by large language model driven agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20746, 2024

arXiv
[49]

Hidden persuaders: Llms’ political leaning and their influence on voters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24190, 2024

Yujin Potter, Shiyang Lai, Junsol Kim, James Evans, and Dawn Song. Hidden persuaders: Llms’ political leaning and their influence on voters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24190, 2024

2024 arXiv
[50]

Whose opinions do language models reflect? InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 29971–30004, 2023

Shibani Santurkar, Esin Durmus, Faisal Ladhak, Cinoo Lee, Percy Liang, and Tatsunori Hashimoto. Whose opinions do language models reflect? InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 29971–30004, 2023

2023
[51]

Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity: Evidence from survey experiments.Political Science Research and Methods, 11(1):34–52, 2023

Björn Bremer and Reto Bürgisser. Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity: Evidence from survey experiments.Political Science Research and Methods, 11(1):34–52, 2023

2023
[52]

Intelligent computing social modeling and methodological innovations in political science in the era of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16301, 2024

Zhenyu Wang, Yi Xu, Dequan Wang, Lingfeng Zhou, and Yiqi Zhou. Intelligent computing social modeling and methodological innovations in political science in the era of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16301, 2024
[53]

Codebook llms: Adapting political science codebooks for llm use and adapting llms to follow codebooks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10747, 2024

Andrew Halterman and Katherine A Keith. Codebook llms: Adapting political science codebooks for llm use and adapting llms to follow codebooks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10747, 2024

2024
[54]

Unifying local and global knowledge: Empowering large language models as political experts with knowledge graphs

Xinyi Mou, Zejun Li, Hanjia Lyu, Jiebo Luo, and Zhongyu Wei. Unifying local and global knowledge: Empowering large language models as political experts with knowledge graphs. InProceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2024, pages 2603–2614, 2024

2024
[55]

Simulatingtheussenate: Anllm-drivenagentapproachtomodeling legislative behavior and bipartisanship.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18702, 2024

ZacharyRBakerandZarifLAzher. Simulatingtheussenate: Anllm-drivenagentapproachtomodeling legislative behavior and bipartisanship.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18702, 2024

2024 arXiv
[56]

How susceptible are large language models to ideological manipulation?arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11725, 2024

Kai Chen, Zihao He, Jun Yan, Taiwei Shi, and Kristina Lerman. How susceptible are large language models to ideological manipulation?arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11725, 2024

2024 arXiv
[57]

Inducing political bias allows language models anticipate partisan reactions to controversies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09687, 2023

Zihao He, Siyi Guo, Ashwin Rao, and Kristina Lerman. Inducing political bias allows language models anticipate partisan reactions to controversies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09687, 2023

2023 arXiv
[58]

Llm lies: Hallucinations are not bugs, but features as adversarial examples.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01469, 2023

Jia-Yu Yao, Kun-Peng Ning, Zhen-Hui Liu, Mu-Nan Ning, Yu-Yang Liu, and Li Yuan. Llm lies: Hallucinations are not bugs, but features as adversarial examples.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01469, 2023. 41 Political-LLM

2023 arXiv
[59]

Asurveyonlargelanguage model (llm) security and privacy: The good, the bad, and the ugly.High-Confidence Computing, page 100211, 2024

YifanYao,JinhaoDuan,KaidiXu,YuanfangCai,ZhiboSun,andYueZhang. Asurveyonlargelanguage model (llm) security and privacy: The good, the bad, and the ugly.High-Confidence Computing, page 100211, 2024

2024
[60]

Integrating large language models in political discourse studies on social media: Challenges of validating an llms-in-the-loop pipeline.Sociologica, 18(2):87–107, 2024

Giada Marino and Fabio Giglietto. Integrating large language models in political discourse studies on social media: Challenges of validating an llms-in-the-loop pipeline.Sociologica, 18(2):87–107, 2024

2024
[61]

Editing factual knowledge in language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08164, 2021

Nicola De Cao, Wilker Aziz, and Ivan Titov. Editing factual knowledge in language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08164, 2021

2021 arXiv
[62]

Knowledge editing for large language models: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys, 2023

Song Wang, Yaochen Zhu, Haochen Liu, Zaiyi Zheng, Chen Chen, and Jundong Li. Knowledge editing for large language models: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys, 2023

2023
[63]

Rethinking machine unlearning for large language models

Sĳia Liu, Yuanshun Yao, Jinghan Jia, Stephen Casper, Nathalie Baracaldo, Peter Hase, Yuguang Yao, Chris Yuhao Liu, Xiaojun Xu, Hang Li, et al. Rethinking machine unlearning for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.08787, 2024

2024 arXiv
[64]

Towards safer large language models through machine unlearning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.10058, 2024

Zheyuan Liu, Guangyao Dou, Zhaoxuan Tan, Yĳun Tian, and Meng Jiang. Towards safer large language models through machine unlearning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.10058, 2024

2024 arXiv
[65]

Llm-potus score: A framework of analyzing presidential debates with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08147, 2024

Zhengliang Liu, Yiwei Li, Oleksandra Zolotarevych, Rongwei Yang, and Tianming Liu. Llm-potus score: A framework of analyzing presidential debates with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08147, 2024

2024 arXiv
[66]

More human than human: Measuring chatgpt political bias.Public Choice, 198(1):3–23, 2024

Fabio Motoki, Valdemar Pinho Neto, and Victor Rodrigues. More human than human: Measuring chatgpt political bias.Public Choice, 198(1):3–23, 2024

2024
[67]

Large language models and political science

Mitchell Linegar, Rafal Kocielnik, and R Michael Alvarez. Large language models and political science. Frontiers in Political Science, 5:1257092, 2023

2023
[68]

Poliprompt: A high-performance cost-effective llm-based text classification framework for political science.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01466, 2024

Menglin Liu and Ge Shi. Poliprompt: A high-performance cost-effective llm-based text classification framework for political science.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01466, 2024

2024 arXiv
[69]

L (u) pin: Llm-based political ideology nowcasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.07320, 2024

Ken Kato, Annabelle Purnomo, Christopher Cochrane, and Raeid Saqur. L (u) pin: Llm-based political ideology nowcasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.07320, 2024

2024 arXiv
[70]

Llm voting: Human choices and ai collective decision making.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01766, 2024

Joshua C Yang, Marcin Korecki, Damian Dailisan, Carina I Hausladen, and Dirk Helbing. Llm voting: Human choices and ai collective decision making.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01766, 2024

2024 arXiv
[71]

Dellma: Decision making under uncertainty with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02392, 2024

Ollie Liu, Deqing Fu, Dani Yogatama, and Willie Neiswanger. Dellma: Decision making under uncertainty with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02392, 2024

2024 arXiv
[72]

Deep learning for political science.The SAGE handbook of research methods in political science and international relations, pages 1053–1078, 2020

Kakia Chatsiou and Slava Jankin Mikhaylov. Deep learning for political science.The SAGE handbook of research methods in political science and international relations, pages 1053–1078, 2020

2020
[73]

Large language models can be used to estimate the ideologies of politicians in a zero-shot learning setting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12057, 2023

Patrick Y Wu, Joshua A Tucker, Jonathan Nagler, and Solomon Messing. Large language models can be used to estimate the ideologies of politicians in a zero-shot learning setting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12057, 2023

2023 arXiv
[74]

Investigating llms as voting assistants via contextual augmentation: A case study on the european parliament elections 2024.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08495, 2024

Ilias Chalkidis. Investigating llms as voting assistants via contextual augmentation: A case study on the european parliament elections 2024.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08495, 2024

2024 arXiv
[76]

Demonstrations of the potential of ai-based political issue polling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04781, 2023

Nathan E Sanders, Alex Ulinich, and Bruce Schneier. Demonstrations of the potential of ai-based political issue polling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04781, 2023

2023 arXiv
[77]

Comparingthepersuasivenessof role-playing large language models and human experts on polarized us political issues.OSF Preprints, 10, 2023

KobiHackenburg,LujainIbrahim,BenMTappin,andManosTsakiris. Comparingthepersuasivenessof role-playing large language models and human experts on polarized us political issues.OSF Preprints, 10, 2023

2023
[78]

SethLazarandLorenzoManuali.Canllmsadvancedemocraticvalues? arXivpreprintarXiv:2410.08418 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[79]

Large language models (llms) as agents for augmented democracy.Philosophical Transactions A, 382(2285):20240100, 2024

Jairo F Gudiño, Umberto Grandi, and César Hidalgo. Large language models (llms) as agents for augmented democracy.Philosophical Transactions A, 382(2285):20240100, 2024. 42 Political-LLM

2024
[80]

A comparison of methods in political science text classification: Transfer learning language models for politics.Available at SSRN 3724644, 2020

Zhanna Terechshenko, Fridolin Linder, Vishakh Padmakumar, Michael Liu, Jonathan Nagler, Joshua A Tucker, and Richard Bonneau. A comparison of methods in political science text classification: Transfer learning language models for politics.Available at SSRN 3724644, 2020

2020
[81]

Applications of gpt in political science research, 2024

Kyuwon Lee, Simone Paci, Jeongmin Park, Hye Young You, and Sylvan Zheng. Applications of gpt in political science research, 2024

2024
[82]

The political biases of chatgpt.Social Sciences, 12(3):148, 2023

David Rozado. The political biases of chatgpt.Social Sciences, 12(3):148, 2023

2023
[83]

How to train your stochastic parrot: Large language models for political texts

Joseph T Ornstein, Elise N Blasingame, and Jake S Truscott. How to train your stochastic parrot: Large language models for political texts. Technical report, Working Paper, 2022

2022
[84]

Ethical and social risks of harm from language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.04359, 2021

Laura Weidinger, John Mellor, Maribeth Rauh, Conor Griffin, Jonathan Uesato, Po-Sen Huang, Myra Cheng, Mia Glaese, Borja Balle, Atoosa Kasirzadeh, et al. Ethical and social risks of harm from language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.04359, 2021

2021 arXiv
[85]

A survey on computational politics.IEEE Access, 8:197379–197406, 2020

Ehsan Ul Haq, Tristan Braud, Young D Kwon, and Pan Hui. A survey on computational politics.IEEE Access, 8:197379–197406, 2020

2020
[86]

Machine learning for social science: An agnostic approach.Annual Review of Political Science, 24(1):395–419, 2021

Justin Grimmer, Margaret E Roberts, and Brandon M Stewart. Machine learning for social science: An agnostic approach.Annual Review of Political Science, 24(1):395–419, 2021

2021
[87]

Ananalysisofthe2002presidentialelectionsusinglogisticregression

JairoNicolau. Ananalysisofthe2002presidentialelectionsusinglogisticregression. Brazilianpolitical science review, 1(1):125–135, 2007

2007
[88]

Separating the wheat from the chaff: Applications of automated document classification using support vector machines.Political analysis, 22(2):224–242, 2014

Vito d’Orazio, Steven T Landis, Glenn Palmer, and Philip Schrodt. Separating the wheat from the chaff: Applications of automated document classification using support vector machines.Political analysis, 22(2):224–242, 2014

2014
[89]

Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality.Advances in neural information processing systems, 26, 2013

Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality.Advances in neural information processing systems, 26, 2013

2013
[90]

Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805, 2018

Jacob Devlin. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805, 2018

2018 arXiv
[91]

Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin

Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. InThe Thirty-first Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017

2017
[92]

Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, and Others

Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, and Others. Language models are few-shot learners, 2020

2020
[93]

Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer

Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of machine learning research, 21(140):1–67, 2020

2020
[94]

Evaluating retrieval quality in retrieval-augmented generation

Alireza Salemi and Hamed Zamani. Evaluating retrieval quality in retrieval-augmented generation. In Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 2395–2400, 2024

2024
[95]

Improving knowledge extraction from llms for task learning through agent analysis

James R Kirk, Robert E Wray, Peter Lindes, and John E Laird. Improving knowledge extraction from llms for task learning through agent analysis. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 18390–18398, 2024

2024
[96]

Low-rank approximation for sparse attention in multi-modal llms

Lin Song, Yukang Chen, Shuai Yang, Xiaohan Ding, Yixiao Ge, Ying-Cong Chen, and Ying Shan. Low-rank approximation for sparse attention in multi-modal llms. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 13763–13773, 2024

2024
[97]

Sampleattention: Near-lossless acceleration of long context llm inference with adaptive structured sparse attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.15486, 2024

Qianchao Zhu, Jiangfei Duan, Chang Chen, Siran Liu, Xiuhong Li, Guanyu Feng, Xin Lv, Huanqi Cao, Xiao Chuanfu, Xingcheng Zhang, et al. Sampleattention: Near-lossless acceleration of long context llm inference with adaptive structured sparse attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406....

2024 arXiv
[98]

Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models, 2023

Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, Aurelien Rodriguez, Armand Joulin, Edouard Grave, and Guillaume Lample. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language...

2023
[99]

Gpt-4 technical report

Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023

2023 arXiv
[100]

Autoregressive large language models are computationally universal.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03170, 2024

Dale Schuurmans, Hanjun Dai, and Francesco Zanini. Autoregressive large language models are computationally universal.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03170, 2024

2024 arXiv
[101]

What the [mask]? making sense of language-specific bert models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.02912, 2020

Debora Nozza, Federico Bianchi, and Dirk Hovy. What the [mask]? making sense of language-specific bert models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.02912, 2020

2003 arXiv
[102]

Label supervised llama finetuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01208, 2023

Zongxi Li, Xianming Li, Yuzhang Liu, Haoran Xie, Jing Li, Fu-lee Wang, Qing Li, and Xiaoqin Zhong. Label supervised llama finetuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01208, 2023

2023 arXiv
[103]

Instruction tuning for large language models: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.10792, 2023

Shengyu Zhang, Linfeng Dong, Xiaoya Li, Sen Zhang, Xiaofei Sun, Shuhe Wang, Jiwei Li, Runyi Hu, Tianwei Zhang, Fei Wu, et al. Instruction tuning for large language models: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.10792, 2023

2023
[104]

Rlaif vs

Harrison Lee, Samrat Phatale, Hassan Mansoor, Thomas Mesnard, Johan Ferret, Kellie Ren Lu, Colton Bishop, Ethan Hall, Victor Carbune, Abhinav Rastogi, et al. Rlaif vs. rlhf: Scaling reinforcement learning from human feedback with ai feedback. InForty-first International Confer...

2024
[105]

Largelanguage models are zero-shot reasoners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:22199–22213, 2022

TakeshiKojima,ShixiangShaneGu,MachelReid,YutakaMatsuo,andYusukeIwasawa. Largelanguage models are zero-shot reasoners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:22199–22213, 2022

2022
[106]

Truefew-shotlearningwithlanguagemodels

EthanPerez,DouweKiela,andKyunghyunCho. Truefew-shotlearningwithlanguagemodels. Advances in neural information processing systems, 34:11054–11070, 2021

2021
[107]

In-context retrieval-augmented language models.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 11:1316–1331, 2023

Ori Ram, Yoav Levine, Itay Dalmedigos, Dor Muhlgay, Amnon Shashua, Kevin Leyton-Brown, and Yoav Shoham. In-context retrieval-augmented language models.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 11:1316–1331, 2023

2023
[108]

Pedal: Enhancinggreedydecodingwithlargelanguagemodelsusingdiverseexemplars

SumanthPrabhu. Pedal: Enhancinggreedydecodingwithlargelanguagemodelsusingdiverseexemplars. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.08869, 2024

2024 arXiv
[109]

Self-evaluation guided beam search for reasoning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Yuxi Xie, Kenji Kawaguchi, Yiran Zhao, James Xu Zhao, Min-Yen Kan, Junxian He, and Michael Xie. Self-evaluation guided beam search for reasoning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

2024
[110]

Prioritysamplingoflargelanguagemodelsforcompilers

Dejan Grubisic, Volker Seeker, Gabriel Synnaeve, Hugh Leather, John Mellor-Crummey, and Chris Cummins. Prioritysamplingoflargelanguagemodelsforcompilers. In Proceedingsofthe4thWorkshop on Machine Learning and Systems, pages 91–97, 2024

2024
[111]

A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with chatgpt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11382, 2023

Jules White, Quchen Fu, Sam Hays, Michael Sandborn, Carlos Olea, Henry Gilbert, Ashraf Elnashar, Jesse Spencer-Smith, and Douglas C Schmidt. A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with chatgpt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11382, 2023

2023 arXiv
[112]

Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Tom Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

2024
[113]

Knowledge injection to counter large language model (llm) hallucination

Ariana Martino, Michael Iannelli, and Coleen Truong. Knowledge injection to counter large language model (llm) hallucination. InEuropean Semantic Web Conference, pages 182–185. Springer, 2023

2023
[114]

Efficient large-scale language model training on gpu clusters using megatron-lm

Deepak Narayanan, Mohammad Shoeybi, Jared Casper, et al. Efficient large-scale language model training on gpu clusters using megatron-lm. InProceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, pages 1–15, 2021

2021
[115]

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning of large-scale pre-trained language models.Nature Machine Intelligence, 5(3):220–235, 2023

Ning Ding, Yujia Qin, Guang Yang, Fuchao Wei, Zonghan Yang, Yusheng Su, Shengding Hu, Yulin Chen, Chi-Min Chan, Weize Chen, et al. Parameter-efficient fine-tuning of large-scale pre-trained language models.Nature Machine Intelligence, 5(3):220–235, 2023

2023
[116]

Fast distributed inference serving for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.05920, 2023

Bingyang Wu, Yinmin Zhong, Zili Zhang, Shengyu Liu, Fangyue Liu, Yuanhang Sun, Gang Huang, Xuanzhe Liu, and Xin Jin. Fast distributed inference serving for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.05920, 2023. 44 Political-LLM

2023 arXiv
[117]

Powerinfer: Fast large language model serving with a consumer-grade gpu

Yixin Song, Zeyu Mi, Haotong Xie, and Haibo Chen. Powerinfer: Fast large language model serving with a consumer-grade gpu. InProceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 30th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 590–606, 2024

2024
[118]

Melora: Mini-ensemble low-rank adapters for parameter-efficient fine-tuning

Pengjie Ren, Chengshun Shi, Shiguang Wu, Mengqi Zhang, Zhaochun Ren, Maarten Rĳke, Zhumin Chen, and Jiahuan Pei. Melora: Mini-ensemble low-rank adapters for parameter-efficient fine-tuning. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguist...

2024
[119]

On the effectiveness of parameter-efficient fine-tuning

Zihao Fu, Haoran Yang, Anthony Man-Cho So, Wai Lam, Lidong Bing, and Nigel Collier. On the effectiveness of parameter-efficient fine-tuning. InProceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, pages 12799–12807, 2023

2023
[120]

Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention

Woosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng, Lianmin Zheng, Cody Hao Yu, Joseph Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica. Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention. InProceedings of the 29th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pa...

2023
[121]

TensorRT-LLM.https://github.com/NVIDIA/TensorRT-LLM

NVIDIA. TensorRT-LLM.https://github.com/NVIDIA/TensorRT-LLM
[122]

A survey of controllable text generation using transformer-based pre-trained language models.ACM Computing Surveys, 56(3):1–37, 2023

Hanqing Zhang, Haolin Song, Shaoyu Li, Ming Zhou, and Dawei Song. A survey of controllable text generation using transformer-based pre-trained language models.ACM Computing Surveys, 56(3):1–37, 2023

2023
[123]

Hidden persuaders: Llms’ political leaning and their influence on voters, 2024

Yujin Potter, Shiyang Lai, Junsol Kim, James Evans, and Dawn Song. Hidden persuaders: Llms’ political leaning and their influence on voters, 2024

2024
[124]

(a) i am not a lawyer, but...: Engaging legal experts towards responsible llm policies for legal advice

Inyoung Cheong, King Xia, KJ Kevin Feng, Quan Ze Chen, and Amy X Zhang. (a) i am not a lawyer, but...: Engaging legal experts towards responsible llm policies for legal advice. InThe 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pages 2454–2469, 2024

2024
[125]

Fake news in sheep’s clothing: Robust fake news detection againstllm-empoweredstyleattacks

Jiaying Wu, Jiafeng Guo, and Bryan Hooi. Fake news in sheep’s clothing: Robust fake news detection againstllm-empoweredstyleattacks. In Proceedingsofthe30thACMSIGKDDConferenceonKnowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 3367–3378, 2024

2024
[126]

How great is the current danger to democracy? assessing the risk with historical data

Daniel Treisman. How great is the current danger to democracy? assessing the risk with historical data. Comparative Political Studies, 56(12):1924–1952, 2023

1924
[127]

Human-level play in the game of diplomacy by combining language models with strategic reasoning

Meta Fundamental AI Research Diplomacy Team (FAIR)†, Anton Bakhtin, Noam Brown, Emily Dinan, Gabriele Farina, Colin Flaherty, Daniel Fried, Andrew Goff, Jonathan Gray, Hengyuan Hu, et al. Human-level play in the game of diplomacy by combining language models with strategic rea...

2022
[128]

Leveraging knowledge graphs and llms to support and monitor legislative systems

Andrea Colombo. Leveraging knowledge graphs and llms to support and monitor legislative systems. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pages 5443–5446, 2024

2024
[129]

Using imperfect surrogates for downstreaminference: Design-basedsupervisedlearningforsocialscienceapplicationsoflargelanguage models

Naoki Egami, Musashi Hinck, Brandon Stewart, and Hanying Wei. Using imperfect surrogates for downstreaminference: Design-basedsupervisedlearningforsocialscienceapplicationsoflargelanguage models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

2024
[130]

POLITICS: Pretraining withsame-story articlecomparison forideology prediction and stance detection

YujianLiu,XinliangFrederickZhang,DavidWegsman,NicholasBeauchamp,andLuWang. POLITICS: Pretraining withsame-story articlecomparison forideology prediction and stance detection. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2022, pages 1354–1374, Seattle, Uni...

2022
[131]

Llama meets EU: Investigating the European political spectrum through the lens of LLMs

Ilias Chalkidis and Stephanie Brandl. Llama meets EU: Investigating the European political spectrum through the lens of LLMs. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volum...

2024
[132]

Canlargelanguagemodelsdetectmisinformation in scientific news reporting?arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14268, 2024

YupengCao,AishwaryaMuralidharanNair,ElyonEyimife,NastaranJamalipourSoofi,KPSubbalakshmi, JohnRWullertII,ChumkiBasu,andDavidShallcross. Canlargelanguagemodelsdetectmisinformation in scientific news reporting?arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14268, 2024. 45 Political-LLM

2024
[133]

Evaluating large language models for user stance detection on x (twitter).Machine Learning, pages 1–24, 2024

Margherita Gambini, Caterina Senette, Tiziano Fagni, and Maurizio Tesconi. Evaluating large language models for user stance detection on x (twitter).Machine Learning, pages 1–24, 2024

2024
[134]

Explainable Fake News Detection with Large Language Model via Defense Among Competing Wisdom

Bo Wang, Jing Ma, Hongzhan Lin, Zhiwei Yang, Ruichao Yang, Yuan Tian, and Yi Chang. Explainable Fake News Detection with Large Language Model via Defense Among Competing Wisdom. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2024, WWW ’24, pages 2452–2463, New York, NY, USA, May 202...

2024
[135]

FakeNewsinSheep’sClothing: RobustFakeNewsDetection Against LLM-Empowered Style Attacks

JiayingWu,JiafengGuo,andBryanHooi. FakeNewsinSheep’sClothing: RobustFakeNewsDetection Against LLM-Empowered Style Attacks. InProceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 3367–3378, 2024. arXiv:2310.10830 [cs]

2024 arXiv
[136]

Bad actor, good advisor: Exploring the role of large language models in fake news detection

Beizhe Hu, Qiang Sheng, Juan Cao, Yuhui Shi, Yang Li, Danding Wang, and Peng Qi. Bad actor, good advisor: Exploring the role of large language models in fake news detection. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 38, pages 22105–22113, 2024

2024
[137]

Evaluation of fake news detection with knowledge-enhanced language models

Chenxi Whitehouse, Tillman Weyde, Pranava Madhyastha, and Nikos Komninos. Evaluation of fake news detection with knowledge-enhanced language models. InProceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, volume 16, pages 1425–1429, 2022

2022
[138]

Can you label less by using out-of-domain data? active & transfer learning with few-shot instructions

Rafal Kocielnik, Sara Kangaslahti, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Meena Hari, Michael Alvarez, and Anima Anandkumar. Can you label less by using out-of-domain data? active & transfer learning with few-shot instructions. InTransfer Learning for Natural Language Processing Workshop, pages ...

2023
[139]

Corporate opposition to climate change disclosure regulation in the united states.Climate Policy, pages 1–16, 2024

Addisu Lashitew and Youqing Mu. Corporate opposition to climate change disclosure regulation in the united states.Climate Policy, pages 1–16, 2024

2024
[140]

Xinyu Fu, Thomas W Sanchez, Chaosu Li, and Juliana Reu Junqueira. Deciphering public voices in the digital era: Benchmarking chatgpt for analyzing citizen feedback in hamilton, new zealand.Journal of the American Planning Association, pages 1–14, 2024

2024
[141]

Measuringexecutiveagencyideologyusinglargelanguagemodels

NicholasGNapolio. Measuringexecutiveagencyideologyusinglargelanguagemodels. WorkingPaper, 2024

2024
[143]

Generative ai and the future of elections, 2023

R Michael Alvarez, Frederick Eberhardt, and Mitchell Linegar. Generative ai and the future of elections, 2023

2023
[144]

Large language models can argue in convincing and novel ways about politics: Evidence from experiments and human judgement.Github Prepr, 2023

Alexis Palmer and Arthur Spirling. Large language models can argue in convincing and novel ways about politics: Evidence from experiments and human judgement.Github Prepr, 2023

2023
[145]

Evaluating the quality of answers in political q&a sessions with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.08816, 2024

R Michael Alvarez and Jacob Morrier. Evaluating the quality of answers in political q&a sessions with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.08816, 2024

2024
[146]

Do ais know what the most important issue is? using language models to code open-text social survey responses at scale.Research & Politics, 11(1):20531680241231468, 2024

Jonathan Mellon, Jack Bailey, Ralph Scott, James Breckwoldt, Marta Miori, and Phillip Schmedeman. Do ais know what the most important issue is? using language models to code open-text social survey responses at scale.Research & Politics, 11(1):20531680241231468, 2024

2024
[147]

Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior

Joon Sung Park, Joseph O’Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S Bernstein. Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. InProceedings of the 36th annual acm symposium on user interface software and technology, pages 1–22, 2023

2023
[148]

Large language models empowered agent-based modeling and simulation: A survey and perspectives

Chen Gao, Xiaochong Lan, Nian Li, Yuan Yuan, Jingtao Ding, Zhilun Zhou, Fengli Xu, and Yong Li. Large language models empowered agent-based modeling and simulation: A survey and perspectives. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11970, 2023

2023 arXiv
[149]

A survey on large language model based autonomous agents.Frontiers of Computer Science, 18(6):186345, 2024

LeiWang, ChenMa, XueyangFeng, ZeyuZhang, HaoYang, JingsenZhang, ZhiyuanChen, JiakaiTang, Xu Chen, Yankai Lin, et al. A survey on large language model based autonomous agents.Frontiers of Computer Science, 18(6):186345, 2024. 46 Political-LLM

2024
[150]

Artificial leviathan: Exploring social evolution of llm agents through the lens of hobbesian social contract theory

GordonDai,WeĳiaZhang,JinhanLi,SiqiYang,SrihasRao,ArthurCaetano,MishaSra,etal. Artificial leviathan: Exploring social evolution of llm agents through the lens of hobbesian social contract theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.14373, 2024

2024 arXiv
[151]

War and peace (waragent): Large language model-based multi-agent simulation of world wars.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.17227, 2023

Wenyue Hua, Lizhou Fan, Lingyao Li, Kai Mei, Jianchao Ji, Yingqiang Ge, Libby Hemphill, and Yongfeng Zhang. War and peace (waragent): Large language model-based multi-agent simulation of world wars.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.17227, 2023

2023 arXiv
[152]

What if llms have different world views: Simulating alien civilizations with llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13184, 2024

Mingyu Jin, Beichen Wang, Zhaoqian Xue, Suiyuan Zhu, Wenyue Hua, Hua Tang, Kai Mei, Mengnan Du, and Yongfeng Zhang. What if llms have different world views: Simulating alien civilizations with llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13184, 2024

2024 arXiv
[153]

Simulating opinion dynamics with networks of llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09618, 2023

Yun-Shiuan Chuang, Agam Goyal, Nikunj Harlalka, Siddharth Suresh, Robert Hawkins, Sĳia Yang, Dhavan Shah, Junjie Hu, and Timothy T Rogers. Simulating opinion dynamics with networks of llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09618, 2023

2023 arXiv
[154]

Richelieu: Self-evolving llm-based agents for ai diplomacy.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.06813, 2024

Zhenyu Guan, Xiangyu Kong, Fangwei Zhong, and Yizhou Wang. Richelieu: Self-evolving llm-based agents for ai diplomacy.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.06813, 2024

2024
[155]

Modelling political coalition negotiations using llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11712, 2024

Farhad Moghimifar, Yuan-Fang Li, Robert Thomson, and Gholamreza Haffari. Modelling political coalition negotiations using llm-based agents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11712, 2024

2024 arXiv
[156]

Causal inference in natural language processing: Estimation, prediction, interpretation and beyond.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 10:1138–1158, 2022

Amir Feder, Katherine A Keith, Emaad Manzoor, Reid Pryzant, Dhanya Sridhar, Zach Wood-Doughty, Jacob Eisenstein, Justin Grimmer, Roi Reichart, Margaret E Roberts, et al. Causal inference in natural language processing: Estimation, prediction, interpretation and beyond.Transact...

2022
[157]

Cause and Effect: Can Large Language Models Truly Understand Causality?, 2024

Swagata Ashwani, Kshiteesh Hegde, Nishith Reddy Mannuru, Mayank Jindal, Dushyant Singh Sengar, Krishna Chaitanya Rao Kathala, Dishant Banga, Vinĳa Jain, and Aman Chadha. Cause and Effect: Can Large Language Models Truly Understand Causality?, 2024. arXiv:2402.18139 [cs]

2024 arXiv
[158]

Causal parrots: Large language models may talk causality but are not causal.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.13067, 2023

Matej Zečević, Moritz Willig, Devendra Singh Dhami, and Kristian Kersting. Causal parrots: Large language models may talk causality but are not causal.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.13067, 2023

2023 arXiv
[159]

Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality, 2024

Emre Kıcıman, Robert Ness, Amit Sharma, and Chenhao Tan. Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality, 2024. arXiv:2305.00050 [cs]

2024 arXiv
[160]

Prompting Large Language Models for Counterfactual Generation: An Empirical Study, 2024

Yongqi Li, Mayi Xu, Xin Miao, Shen Zhou, and Tieyun Qian. Prompting Large Language Models for Counterfactual Generation: An Empirical Study, 2024. arXiv:2305.14791 [cs]

2024 arXiv
[161]

Zero-shot LLM-guided Counterfactual Generation for Text, 2024

Amrita Bhattacharjee, Raha Moraffah, Joshua Garland, and Huan Liu. Zero-shot LLM-guided Counterfactual Generation for Text, 2024

2024
[162]

The Challenge of Using LLMs to Simulate Human Behavior: A Causal Inference Perspective.SSRN Electronic Journal, 2023

George Gui and Olivier Toubia. The Challenge of Using LLMs to Simulate Human Behavior: A Causal Inference Perspective.SSRN Electronic Journal, 2023. arXiv:2312.15524 [cs]

2023
[163]

Generating Synthetic Text Data to Evaluate Causal Inference Methods, February 2021

Zach Wood-Doughty, Ilya Shpitser, and Mark Dredze. Generating Synthetic Text Data to Evaluate Causal Inference Methods, February 2021. arXiv:2102.05638

2021 arXiv
[164]

Explainability for large language models: A survey.ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 15(2):1–38, 2024

Haiyan Zhao, Hanjie Chen, Fan Yang, Ninghao Liu, Huiqi Deng, Hengyi Cai, Shuaiqiang Wang, Dawei Yin, and Mengnan Du. Explainability for large language models: A survey.ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 15(2):1–38, 2024

2024
[165]

From understanding to utilization: A survey on explainability for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.12874, 2024

Haoyan Luo and Lucia Specia. From understanding to utilization: A survey on explainability for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.12874, 2024

2024 arXiv
[166]

The use of machine learning methods in political science: An in-depth literature review.Political Studies Review, page 14789299241265084, 2024

Jef de Slegte, Filip Van Droogenbroeck, Bram Spruyt, Sam Verboven, and Vincent Ginis. The use of machine learning methods in political science: An in-depth literature review.Political Studies Review, page 14789299241265084, 2024

2024
[167]

End-to-end causaleffectestimationfromunstructurednaturallanguagedata

Nikita Dhawan, Leonardo Cotta, Karen Ullrich, Rahul Krishnan, and Chris J Maddison. End-to-end causaleffectestimationfromunstructurednaturallanguagedata. In TheThirty-eighthAnnualConference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024

2024
[168]

Ai is mastering language

Steven Johnson and Nikita Iziev. Ai is mastering language. should we trust what it says?The New York Times, 4:15, 2022. 47 Political-LLM

2022
[169]

The rise of chatbots in political campaigns: The effects of conversational agents on voting intention.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(20):3984–3995, 2023

Yunju Kim and Heejun Lee. The rise of chatbots in political campaigns: The effects of conversational agents on voting intention.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(20):3984–3995, 2023

2023
[170]

Large language models portray socially subordinate groups as more homogeneous, consistent with a bias observed in humans

Messi HJ Lee, Jacob M Montgomery, and Calvin K Lai. Large language models portray socially subordinate groups as more homogeneous, consistent with a bias observed in humans. InThe 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pages 1321–1340, 2024

2024
[171]

Quantifyinggenderbiastowardspoliticiansincross-linguallanguagemodels

Karolina Stańczak, Sagnik Ray Choudhury, Tiago Pimentel, Ryan Cotterell, and Isabelle Augenstein. Quantifyinggenderbiastowardspoliticiansincross-linguallanguagemodels. Plosone,18(11):e0277640, 2023

2023
[172]

Communitylm: Probing partisan worldviews from language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.07065, 2022

Hang Jiang, Doug Beeferman, Brandon Roy, and Deb Roy. Communitylm: Probing partisan worldviews from language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.07065, 2022

2022 arXiv
[173]

Moral mimicry: Large language models produce moral rationalizations tailored to political identity

Gabriel Simmons. Moral mimicry: Large language models produce moral rationalizations tailored to political identity. InProceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop), pages 282–297, 2023

2023
[174]

Evaluating the persuasive influence of political microtargeting with large language models.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(24):e2403116121, 2024

Kobi Hackenburg and Helen Margetts. Evaluating the persuasive influence of political microtargeting with large language models.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(24):e2403116121, 2024

2024
[175]

Politics as usual? measuring populism, nationalism, andauthoritarianisminuspresidentialcampaigns(1952–2020)withneurallanguagemodels

Bart Bonikowski, Yuchen Luo, and Oscar Stuhler. Politics as usual? measuring populism, nationalism, andauthoritarianisminuspresidentialcampaigns(1952–2020)withneurallanguagemodels. Sociological Methods & Research, 51(4):1721–1787, 2022

1952
[176]

The use of ai by election campaigns.OSF, 2024

Florian Foos. The use of ai by election campaigns.OSF, 2024

2024
[177]

Willtrumpwinin2024? predicting the us presidential election via multi-step reasoning with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.03321, 2024

ChenxiaoYu,ZhaotianWeng,ZhengLi,XiyangHu,andYueZhao. Willtrumpwinin2024? predicting the us presidential election via multi-step reasoning with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.03321, 2024

2024 arXiv
[178]

LisaPArgyle,ChristopherABail,EthanCBusby,JoshuaRGubler,ThomasHowe,ChristopherRytting, Taylor Sorensen, and David Wingate. Leveraging ai for democratic discourse: Chat interventions can improve online political conversations at scale.Proceedings of the National Academy of Scien...

2023
[179]

chatgpt, don’t tell me what to do

ZIlin Ma, Yiyang Mei, Claude Bruderlein, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Weiwei Pan. " chatgpt, don’t tell me what to do": Designing ai for context analysis in humanitarian frontline negotiations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.09139, 2024

2024 arXiv
[180]

Author’s sentiment prediction

Mohaddeseh Bastan, Mahnaz Koupaee, Youngseo Son, Richard Sicoli, and Niranjan Balasubramanian. Author’s sentiment prediction. InProceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 604–615, 2020

2020
[181]

Survey of aspect-based sentiment analysis datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.05232, 2022

Siva Uday Sampreeth Chebolu, Franck Dernoncourt, Nedim Lipka, and Thamar Solorio. Survey of aspect-based sentiment analysis datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.05232, 2022

2022 arXiv
[182]

Fake news detection on twitter.International Journal of Web Information Systems, 18(5/6):388–412, 2022

Srishti Sharma, Mala Saraswat, and Anil Kumar Dubey. Fake news detection on twitter.International Journal of Web Information Systems, 18(5/6):388–412, 2022

2022
[183]

Sentiment classification in bengali news comments using a hybrid approach with glove

Uchchhwas Saha, Md Shihab Mahmud, Aisharjo Chakrobortty, Mst Tuhin Akter, MD Rakib Islam, and Ahmed Al Marouf. Sentiment classification in bengali news comments using a hybrid approach with glove. In2022 6th International Conference on Trends in Electronics and Informatics (IC...

2022
[184]

Indonesia covid-19 online media news sentiment analysis with lexicon-based approach and emotion detection

Bayu Waspodo, Amalia Khaerunnisa Nursya Bany, Rinda Hesti Kusumaningtyas, Eri Rustamaji, et al. Indonesia covid-19 online media news sentiment analysis with lexicon-based approach and emotion detection. In2022 10th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (C...

2022
[185]

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. U.S. Senate Precinct-Level Returns 2020.Harvard Dataverse, 2022. 48 Political-LLM

2020
[186]

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. U.S. House of Representatives Precinct-Level Returns 2018. Harvard Dataverse, 2022

2018
[187]

State Precinct-Level Returns 2018.Harvard Dataverse, 2022

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. State Precinct-Level Returns 2018.Harvard Dataverse, 2022

2018
[188]

Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 american presidential election.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2):367–374, 2010

B Keith Payne, Jon A Krosnick, Josh Pasek, Yphtach Lelkes, Omair Akhtar, and Trevor Tompson. Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 american presidential election.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2):367–374, 2010

2008
[189]

Willtrumpwinin2024? predicting the us presidential election via multi-step reasoning with large language models, 2024

ChenxiaoYu,ZhaotianWeng,ZhengLi,XiyangHu,andYueZhao. Willtrumpwinin2024? predicting the us presidential election via multi-step reasoning with large language models, 2024

2024
[190]

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. U.S. President 1976–2020.Harvard Dataverse, 2017

1976
[191]

Billsum: A corpus for automatic summarization of us legislation

Anastassia Kornilova and Vlad Eidelman. Billsum: A corpus for automatic summarization of us legislation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.00523, 2019

1910 arXiv
[192]

Lawllm: Law large language model for the us legal system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21065, 2024

Dong Shu, Haoran Zhao, Xukun Liu, David Demeter, Mengnan Du, and Yongfeng Zhang. Lawllm: Law large language model for the us legal system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21065, 2024

2024 arXiv
[193]

A new dataset on legislative decision-making in the european union: the deu iii dataset.Journal of European Public Policy, 29(1):12–22, 2022

Javier Arregui and Clement Perarnaud. A new dataset on legislative decision-making in the european union: the deu iii dataset.Journal of European Public Policy, 29(1):12–22, 2022

2022
[194]

Fakenewsnet: A data repository with news content, social context, and spatiotemporal information for studying fake news on social media.Big data, 8(3):171–188, 2020

Kai Shu, Deepak Mahudeswaran, Suhang Wang, Dongwon Lee, and Huan Liu. Fakenewsnet: A data repository with news content, social context, and spatiotemporal information for studying fake news on social media.Big data, 8(3):171–188, 2020

2020
[195]

Public wisdom matters! discourse-aware hyperbolic fourier co-attention for social text classification.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:9417–9431, 2022

Karish Grover, SM Angara, Md Shad Akhtar, and Tanmoy Chakraborty. Public wisdom matters! discourse-aware hyperbolic fourier co-attention for social text classification.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:9417–9431, 2022

2022
[196]

Multimodal fusion with recurrent neural networks for rumor detection on microblogs

Zhiwei Jin, Juan Cao, Han Guo, Yongdong Zhang, and Jiebo Luo. Multimodal fusion with recurrent neural networks for rumor detection on microblogs. InProceedings of the 25th ACM international conference on Multimedia, pages 795–816, 2017

2017
[197]

Non-state actors in civil wars: A new dataset.Conflict management and peace science, 30(5):516–531, 2013

David E Cunningham, Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, and Idean Salehyan. Non-state actors in civil wars: A new dataset.Conflict management and peace science, 30(5):516–531, 2013

2013
[198]

Peace negotiations in civil conflicts: A new dataset

Barış Arı. Peace negotiations in civil conflicts: A new dataset. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 67(1):150–177, 2023

2023
[199]

The parlasent multilingual training dataset for sentiment identification in parliamentary proceedings.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09783, 2023

Michal Mochtak, Peter Rupnik, and Nikola Ljubešić. The parlasent multilingual training dataset for sentiment identification in parliamentary proceedings.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09783, 2023

2023 arXiv
[200]

Leak, cheat, repeat: Data contamination and evaluation malpractices in closed-source llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03927, 2024

Simone Balloccu, Patrícia Schmidtová, Mateusz Lango, and Ondřej Dušek. Leak, cheat, repeat: Data contamination and evaluation malpractices in closed-source llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03927, 2024

2024 arXiv
[201]

Multi-aspect annotation and analysis of nepali tweets on anti-establishment election discourse.IEEE Access, 2023

Kritesh Rauniyar, Sweta Poudel, Shuvam Shiwakoti, Surendrabikram Thapa, Junaid Rashid, Jungeun Kim, Muhammad Imran, and Usman Naseem. Multi-aspect annotation and analysis of nepali tweets on anti-establishment election discourse.IEEE Access, 2023

2023
[202]

Largelanguagemodelsfordataannotationandsynthesis: Asurvey

Zhen Tan, Dawei Li, Song Wang, Alimohammad Beigi, Bohan Jiang, Amrita Bhattacharjee, Mansooreh Karami, JundongLi, LuCheng, andHuanLiu. Largelanguagemodelsfordataannotationandsynthesis: Asurvey. InProceedingsofthe2024ConferenceonEmpiricalMethodsinNaturalLanguageProcessing , pag...

2024
[203]

Autolabel: Automated textual data annotation method based on active learning and large language model

Xuran Ming, Shoubin Li, Mingyang Li, Lvlong He, and Qing Wang. Autolabel: Automated textual data annotation method based on active learning and large language model. InInternational Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management, pages 400–411, 2024

2024
[204]

Performance and biases of large language models in public opinion simulation

Yao Qu and Jue Wang. Performance and biases of large language models in public opinion simulation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1):1–13, 2024

2024
[205]

Representation bias in data: A survey on identification and resolution techniques.ACM Computing Surveys, 55(13s):1–39, 2023

Nima Shahbazi, Yin Lin, Abolfazl Asudeh, and HV Jagadish. Representation bias in data: A survey on identification and resolution techniques.ACM Computing Surveys, 55(13s):1–39, 2023. 49 Political-LLM

2023
[206]

Synthetic oversampling: Theory and a practical approach using llms to address data imbalance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.03628, 2024

Ryumei Nakada, Yichen Xu, Lexin Li, and Linjun Zhang. Synthetic oversampling: Theory and a practical approach using llms to address data imbalance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.03628, 2024

2024
[207]

Fine-tuned generative llm oversampling can improve performance over traditional techniques on multiclass imbalanced text classification

Nicolas Antonio Cloutier and Nathalie Japkowicz. Fine-tuned generative llm oversampling can improve performance over traditional techniques on multiclass imbalanced text classification. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData), pages 5181–5186, 2023

2023
[208]

Promptmix: Aclassboundary augmentation method for large language model distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.14192, 2023

GauravSahu,OlgaVechtomova,DzmitryBahdanau,andIssamHLaradji. Promptmix: Aclassboundary augmentation method for large language model distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.14192, 2023

2023 arXiv
[209]

Lm-cppf: Paraphrasing-guided data augmentation for contrastive prompt-based few-shot fine-tuning

Amirhossein Abaskohi, Sascha Rothe, and Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh. Lm-cppf: Paraphrasing-guided data augmentation for contrastive prompt-based few-shot fine-tuning. InProceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), ...

2023
[210]

Identifying citizen-relatedissuesfromsocialmediausingllm-baseddataaugmentation

Vitor Gaboardi dos Santos, Guto Leoni Santos, Theo Lynn, and Boualem Benatallah. Identifying citizen-relatedissuesfromsocialmediausingllm-baseddataaugmentation. In InternationalConference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pages 531–546. Springer, 2024

2024
[211]

Data augmentation using llms: Data perspectives, learning paradigms and challenges.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02990, 2024

Bosheng Ding, Chengwei Qin, Ruochen Zhao, Tianze Luo, Xinze Li, Guizhen Chen, Wenhan Xia, Junjie Hu, Anh Tuan Luu, and Shafiq Joty. Data augmentation using llms: Data perspectives, learning paradigms and challenges.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02990, 2024

2024 arXiv
[212]

When scaling meets llm finetuning: The effect of data, model and finetuning method.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17193, 2024

Biao Zhang, Zhongtao Liu, Colin Cherry, and Orhan Firat. When scaling meets llm finetuning: The effect of data, model and finetuning method.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17193, 2024

2024 arXiv
[213]

Fine tuning llm for enterprise: Practical guidelines and recommendations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10779, 2024

Kushala VM, Harikrishna Warrier, Yogesh Gupta, et al. Fine tuning llm for enterprise: Practical guidelines and recommendations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10779, 2024

2024 arXiv
[214]

Multitask learningforcrashanalysis: Afine-tunedllmframeworkusingtwitterdata

Shadi Jaradat, Richi Nayak, Alexander Paz, Huthaifa I Ashqar, and Mohammad Elhenawy. Multitask learningforcrashanalysis: Afine-tunedllmframeworkusingtwitterdata. SmartCities,7(5):2422–2465, 2024

2024
[215]

In 18th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 24), pages 911–927, 2024

Bingyang Wu, Ruidong Zhu, Zili Zhang, Peng Sun, Xuanzhe Liu, and Xin Jin.{dLoRA}: Dynamically orchestrating requests and adapters for{LoRA}{LLM} serving. In 18th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 24), pages 911–927, 2024

2024
[216]

Novel-wd: Exploring acquisition of novel world knowledge in llms using prefix-tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.17070, 2024

Maxime Méloux and Christophe Cerisara. Novel-wd: Exploring acquisition of novel world knowledge in llms using prefix-tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.17070, 2024

2024 arXiv
[217]

Acco: Accumulate while you communicate, hiding communications in distributed llm training.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02613, 2024

Adel Nabli, Louis Fournier, Pierre Erbacher, Louis Serrano, Eugene Belilovsky, and Edouard Oyallon. Acco: Accumulate while you communicate, hiding communications in distributed llm training.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02613, 2024

2024
[218]

Aptq: Attention-aware post-training mixed-precision quantization for large language models

Ziyi Guan, Hantao Huang, Yupeng Su, Hong Huang, Ngai Wong, and Hao Yu. Aptq: Attention-aware post-training mixed-precision quantization for large language models. InProceedings of the 61st ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, pages 1–6, 2024

2024
[219]

Benchmarkingllmpowered chatbots: methods and metrics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.04624, 2023

DebaragBanerjee,PoojaSingh,ArjunAvadhanam,andSakshamSrivastava. Benchmarkingllmpowered chatbots: methods and metrics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.04624, 2023

2023 arXiv
[220]

Extracting outcomes from appellate decisions in us state courts

Alina Petrova, John Armour, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. Extracting outcomes from appellate decisions in us state courts. InLegal Knowledge and Information Systems, pages 133–142. IOS Press, 2020

2020
[221]

Lexsumm and lext5: Benchmarking and modeling legal summarization tasks in english.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.09527, 2024

TYSS Santosh, Cornelius Weiss, and Matthias Grabmair. Lexsumm and lext5: Benchmarking and modeling legal summarization tasks in english.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.09527, 2024

2024 arXiv
[222]

Legalbench: A collaboratively built benchmark for measuring legal reasoning in large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Neel Guha, Julian Nyarko, Daniel Ho, Christopher Ré, Adam Chilton, Alex Chohlas-Wood, Austin Peters, Brandon Waldon, Daniel Rockmore, Diego Zambrano, et al. Legalbench: A collaboratively built benchmark for measuring legal reasoning in large language models.Advances in Neural ...

2024
[223]

Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners.arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652, 2021

Jason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y Zhao, Kelvin Guu, Adams Wei Yu, Brian Lester, Nan Du, Andrew M Dai, and Quoc V Le. Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners.arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652, 2021. 50 Political-LLM

2021 arXiv
[224]

Zero-shot learning based cross-lingual sentiment analysis for sanskrit text with insufficient labeled data.Applied Intelligence, 53(9):10096– 10113, 2023

Puneet Kumar, Kshitĳ Pathania, and Balasubramanian Raman. Zero-shot learning based cross-lingual sentiment analysis for sanskrit text with insufficient labeled data.Applied Intelligence, 53(9):10096– 10113, 2023

2023
[225]

Mapping (a) ideology: A taxonomy of european parties using generative llms as zero-shot learners.Available at SSRN 4907347, 2024

Riccardo Di Leo, Chen Zeng, Elias Dinas, and Reda Tamtam. Mapping (a) ideology: A taxonomy of european parties using generative llms as zero-shot learners.Available at SSRN 4907347, 2024

2024
[226]

Zero-shotstancedetection: Paradigmsandchallenges

EmilyAllawayandKathleenMcKeown. Zero-shotstancedetection: Paradigmsandchallenges. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5:1070429, 2023

2023
[227]

Dynamic few-shot learning for computational social science.OSF, 2024

Ranadheer Malla, Travis G Coan, Vivek Srinivasan, and Constantine Boussalis. Dynamic few-shot learning for computational social science.OSF, 2024

2024
[228]

Deciphering political entity sentiment in news with large language models: Zero-shot and few-shot strategies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.04361, 2024

Alapan Kuila and Sudeshna Sarkar. Deciphering political entity sentiment in news with large language models: Zero-shot and few-shot strategies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.04361, 2024

2024 arXiv
[229]

Synthesizing political zero-shot relation classification via codebook knowledge, nli, and chatgpt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.07876, 2023

Yibo Hu, Erick Skorupa Parolin, Latifur Khan, Patrick T Brandt, Javier Osorio, and Vito J D’Orazio. Synthesizing political zero-shot relation classification via codebook knowledge, nli, and chatgpt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.07876, 2023

2023 arXiv
[230]

Political debate: Efficient zero-shot and few-shot classifiers for political text.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02078, 2024

Michael Burnham, Kayla Kahn, Ryan Yank Wang, and Rachel X Peng. Political debate: Efficient zero-shot and few-shot classifiers for political text.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02078, 2024

2024 arXiv
[231]

Enhancing zero-shot crypto sentiment with fine-tuned language model and prompt engineering.IEEE Access, 2024

Rahman SM Wahidur, Ishmam Tashdeed, Manjit Kaur, and Heung-No Lee. Enhancing zero-shot crypto sentiment with fine-tuned language model and prompt engineering.IEEE Access, 2024

2024
[232]

More samples or more prompts? exploring effective few-shot in-context learning for llms with in-context sampling

Bingsheng Yao, Guiming Chen, Ruishi Zou, Yuxuan Lu, Jiachen Li, Shao Zhang, Yisi Sang, Sĳia Liu, James Hendler, and Dakuo Wang. More samples or more prompts? exploring effective few-shot in-context learning for llms with in-context sampling. InFindings of the Association for C...

2024
[233]

Analyzing political stances on twitter in the lead-up to the 2024 us election.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.02712, 2024

Hazem Ibrahim, Farhan Khan, Hend Alabdouli, Maryam Almatrooshi, Tran Nguyen, Talal Rahwan, and Yasir Zaki. Analyzing political stances on twitter in the lead-up to the 2024 us election.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.02712, 2024

2024 arXiv
[234]

Under the influence: A survey of large language models in fake news detection.IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 2024

Soveatin Kuntur, Anna Wróblewska, Marcin Paprzycki, and Maria Ganzha. Under the influence: A survey of large language models in fake news detection.IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 2024

2024
[235]

Using gpt models for qualitative and quantitative news analytics in the 2024 us presidental election process.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15884, 2024

Bohdan M Pavlyshenko. Using gpt models for qualitative and quantitative news analytics in the 2024 us presidental election process.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15884, 2024

2024 arXiv
[236]

A multi-modal prompt learning framework for early detection of fake news

Weiqi Hu, Ye Wang, Yan Jia, Qing Liao, and Bin Zhou. A multi-modal prompt learning framework for early detection of fake news. InProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 18, pages 651–662, 2024

2024
[237]

A fine-grained self-adapting prompt learning approach for few-shot learning with pre-trained language models

Xiaojun Chen, Ting Liu, Philippe Fournier-Viger, Bowen Zhang, Guodong Long, and Qin Zhang. A fine-grained self-adapting prompt learning approach for few-shot learning with pre-trained language models. Knowledge-Based Systems, page 111968, 2024

2024
[238]

Evaluating quality of an- swersforretrieval-augmentedgeneration: Astrongllmisallyouneed

Yang Wang, Alberto Garcia Hernandez, Roman Kyslyi, and Nicholas Kersting. Evaluating quality of an- swersforretrieval-augmentedgeneration: Astrongllmisallyouneed. arXivpreprintarXiv:2406.18064 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[239]

Understand what llm needs: Dual preference alignment for retrieval-augmented generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18676, 2024

Guanting Dong, Yutao Zhu, Chenghao Zhang, Zechen Wang, Zhicheng Dou, and Ji-Rong Wen. Understand what llm needs: Dual preference alignment for retrieval-augmented generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18676, 2024

2024 arXiv
[240]

Political-rag: using generative ai to extract political information from media content.Journal of Information Technology & Politics, pages 1–16, 2024

Muhammad Arslan, Saba Munawar, and Christophe Cruz. Political-rag: using generative ai to extract political information from media content.Journal of Information Technology & Politics, pages 1–16, 2024

2024
[241]

Generating chain-of- thoughtswithapairwise-comparisonapproachtosearchingforthemostpromisingintermediatethought

Zhen-Yu Zhang, Siwei Han, Huaxiu Yao, Gang Niu, and Masashi Sugiyama. Generating chain-of- thoughtswithapairwise-comparisonapproachtosearchingforthemostpromisingintermediatethought. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. 51 Political-LLM

2024
[242]

Fighting lies with intelligence: Using large language models and chain of thoughts technique to combat fake news

Waleed Kareem and Noorhan Abbas. Fighting lies with intelligence: Using large language models and chain of thoughts technique to combat fake news. InInternational Conference on Innovative Techniques and Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pages 253–258, 2023

2023
[243]

PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, 2024

Adina Dobrinoiu.Leveraging Large Language Models for Classifying Subjective Arguments in Public Discourse. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, 2024

2024
[244]

Why can large language models generate correct chain-of-thoughts?arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13571, 2023

Rasul Tutunov, Antoine Grosnit, Juliusz Ziomek, Jun Wang, and Haitham Bou-Ammar. Why can large language models generate correct chain-of-thoughts?arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13571, 2023

2023 arXiv
[245]

A comprehensive study of knowledge editing for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01286, 2024

Ningyu Zhang, Yunzhi Yao, Bozhong Tian, Peng Wang, Shumin Deng, Mengru Wang, Zekun Xi, Shengyu Mao, Jintian Zhang, Yuansheng Ni, et al. A comprehensive study of knowledge editing for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01286, 2024

2024 arXiv
[246]

Stackfeed: Structuredtextualactor-critic knowledge base editing with feedback.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.10584, 2024

NamanGupta,ShashankKirtania,PriyanshuGupta,andOthers. Stackfeed: Structuredtextualactor-critic knowledge base editing with feedback.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.10584, 2024

2024
[247]

Oneedit: A neural-symbolic collaboratively knowledge editing system

Ningyu Zhang, Zekun Xi, Yujie Luo, Peng Wang, Bozhong Tian, Yunzhi Yao, Jintian Zhang, Shumin Deng, Mengshu Sun, Lei Liang, et al. Oneedit: A neural-symbolic collaboratively knowledge editing system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.07497, 2024

2024 arXiv
[248]

Event-level knowledge editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13093, 2024

HaoPeng,XiaozhiWang,ChunyangLi,KaishengZeng,JiangshanDuo,YixinCao,LeiHou,andJuanzi Li. Event-level knowledge editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13093, 2024

2024 arXiv
[249]

Better patching using llm prompting, via self-consistency

Toufique Ahmed and Premkumar Devanbu. Better patching using llm prompting, via self-consistency. In2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pages 1742–1746, 2023

2023
[250]

Enhancing large language models in coding through multi-perspective self-consistency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17272, 2023

Baizhou Huang, Shuai Lu, Weizhu Chen, Xiaojun Wan, and Nan Duan. Enhancing large language models in coding through multi-perspective self-consistency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17272, 2023

2023 arXiv
[251]

Integrative decoding: Improve factuality via implicit self-consistency

Yi Cheng, Xiao Liang, Yeyun Gong, Wen Xiao, Song Wang, Yuji Zhang, Wenjun Hou, Kaishuai Xu, Wenge Liu, Wenjie Li, et al. Integrative decoding: Improve factuality via implicit self-consistency. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.01556, 2024

arXiv
[252]

Two failures of self-consistency in the multi-step reasoning of llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14279, 2023

Angelica Chen, Jason Phang, Alicia Parrish, Vishakh Padmakumar, Chen Zhao, Samuel R Bowman, and Kyunghyun Cho. Two failures of self-consistency in the multi-step reasoning of llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14279, 2023

2023 arXiv
[253]

Gpt-4o: The cutting-edge advancement in multimodal llm

Raisa Islam and Owana Marzia Moushi. Gpt-4o: The cutting-edge advancement in multimodal llm. Authorea Preprints, 2024

2024
[254]

Taskcomplexity: A dataset for task complexity classification with in-context learning, flan-t5 and gpt-4o benchmarks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.20189, 2024

Areeg Fahad Rasheed, M Zarkoosh, Safa F Abbas, and Sana Sabah Al-Azzawi. Taskcomplexity: A dataset for task complexity classification with in-context learning, flan-t5 and gpt-4o benchmarks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.20189, 2024

2024 arXiv
[255]

Magicdec: Breaking the latency-throughput tradeoff for long context generation with speculative decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.11049, 2024

Jian Chen, Vashisth Tiwari, Ranajoy Sadhukhan, Zhuoming Chen, Jinyuan Shi, Ian En-Hsu Yen, and Beidi Chen. Magicdec: Breaking the latency-throughput tradeoff for long context generation with speculative decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.11049, 2024

2024 arXiv
[256]

Scidqa: A deep reading comprehension dataset over scientific papers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05338, 2024

Shruti Singh, Nandan Sarkar, and Arman Cohan. Scidqa: A deep reading comprehension dataset over scientific papers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05338, 2024

2024 arXiv
[257]

Anes 2016 time series study full release

American National Election Studies. Anes 2016 time series study full release. https://www. electionstudies.org, 2019. [Dataset and documentation]. September 4, 2019 version

2016
[258]

An evaluation of the 2016 election polls in the united states.Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(1):1–33, 2018

Courtney Kennedy, Mark Blumenthal, Scott Clement, et al. An evaluation of the 2016 election polls in the united states.Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(1):1–33, 2018

2016
[259]

Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples

LisaP.Argyle,EthanC.Busby,NancyFulda,JoshuaR.Gubler,ChristopherRytting,andDavidWingate. Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples. PoliticalAnalysis,31(3):337–351, 2023

2023
[260]

Representation bias in political sample simulations with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.11409, 2024

Weihong Qi, Hanjia Lyu, and Jiebo Luo. Representation bias in political sample simulations with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.11409, 2024. 52 Political-LLM

2024 arXiv
[261]

Generative ai voting: Fair collective choice is resilient to llm biases and inconsistencies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11871, 2024

Srĳoni Majumdar, Edith Elkind, and Evangelos Pournaras. Generative ai voting: Fair collective choice is resilient to llm biases and inconsistencies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11871, 2024

2024
[262]

StefanSylviusWagner,MaikeBehrendt,MarcZiegele,andStefanHarmeling.Thepowerofllm-generated synthetic data for stance detection in online political discussions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12480, 2024

2024 arXiv
[263]

Assessing bias in llm-generated synthetic datasets: The case of german voter behavior

Leah von der Heyde, Anna-Carolina Haensch, and Alexander Wenz. Assessing bias in llm-generated synthetic datasets: The case of german voter behavior. Technical report, Center for Open Science, 2023

2023
[264]

Social science meets llms: How reliable are large language models in social simulations?arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23426, 2024

Yue Huang, Zhengqing Yuan, Yujun Zhou, Kehan Guo, Xiangqi Wang, Haomin Zhuang, Weixiang Sun, Lichao Sun, Jindong Wang, Yanfang Ye, et al. Social science meets llms: How reliable are large language models in social simulations?arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23426, 2024

arXiv
[265]

Deductive verification of chain-of-thought reasoning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Zhan Ling, Yunhao Fang, Xuanlin Li, Zhiao Huang, Mingu Lee, Roland Memisevic, and Hao Su. Deductive verification of chain-of-thought reasoning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

2024
[266]

Can editing llms inject harm?arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20224, 2024

Canyu Chen, Baixiang Huang, Zekun Li, Zhaorun Chen, Shiyang Lai, Xiongxiao Xu, Jia-Chen Gu, Jindong Gu, Huaxiu Yao, Chaowei Xiao, et al. Can editing llms inject harm?arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20224, 2024

2024
[267]

Natural language processing: state of the art, current trends and challenges.Multimedia tools and applications, 82(3):3713–3744, 2023

Diksha Khurana, Aditya Koli, Kiran Khatter, and Sukhdev Singh. Natural language processing: state of the art, current trends and challenges.Multimedia tools and applications, 82(3):3713–3744, 2023

2023
[268]

Measuring political bias in large language models: What is said and how it is said.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.18932, 2024

Yejin Bang, Delong Chen, Nayeon Lee, and Pascale Fung. Measuring political bias in large language models: What is said and how it is said.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.18932, 2024

2024 arXiv
[269]

Twin-gpt: Digital twins for clinical trials via large language model.ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications and Applications, 2024

Yue Wang, Yinlong Xu, Zihan Ma, Hongxia Xu, Bang Du, Honghao Gao, Jian Wu, and Jintai Chen. Twin-gpt: Digital twins for clinical trials via large language model.ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications and Applications, 2024

2024
[270]

Agent-basedmodels

ScottDeMarchiandScottEPage. Agent-basedmodels. AnnualReviewofpoliticalscience , 17(1):1–20, 2014

2014
[271]

Computational and mathematical modeling in the social sciences

Scott De Marchi. Computational and mathematical modeling in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press, 2005

2005
[272]

Comal: Collaborative multi-agent large language models for mixed-autonomy traffic.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14368, 2024

Huaiyuan Yao, Longchao Da, Vishnu Nandam, Justin Turnau, Zhiwei Liu, Linsey Pang, and Hua Wei. Comal: Collaborative multi-agent large language models for mixed-autonomy traffic.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14368, 2024

2024 arXiv
[273]

C2P: Featuring Large Language Models with Causal Reasoning, 2024

Abdolmahdi Bagheri, Matin Alinejad, Kevin Bello, and Alireza Akhondi-Asl. C2P: Featuring Large Language Models with Causal Reasoning, 2024. arXiv:2407.18069 [cs]

2024
[274]

Efficient Causal Graph Discovery Using Large Language Models, 2024

Thomas Jiralerspong, Xiaoyin Chen, Yash More, Vedant Shah, and Yoshua Bengio. Efficient Causal Graph Discovery Using Large Language Models, 2024. arXiv:2402.01207 [cs]

2024 arXiv
[275]

Conspiracy narratives on voat: A longitudinal analysis of cognitive activation and evolutionary psychology features

Veronika Batzdorfer. Conspiracy narratives on voat: A longitudinal analysis of cognitive activation and evolutionary psychology features. InProceedings of the 16th ACM Web Science Conference, pages 42–47, 2024

2024
[276]

Causal inference using llm-guided discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15117, 2023

AniketVashishtha,AbbavaramGowthamReddy,AbhinavKumar,SakethBachu,VineethNBalasubrama- nian, and Amit Sharma. Causal inference using llm-guided discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15117, 2023

2023 arXiv
[277]

Cause and effect: Can large language models truly understand causality? InProceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series, volume 4, pages 2–9, 2024

Swagata Ashwani, Kshiteesh Hegde, Nishith Reddy Mannuru, Dushyant Singh Sengar, Mayank Jindal, Krishna Chaitanya Rao Kathala, Dishant Banga, Vinĳa Jain, and Aman Chadha. Cause and effect: Can large language models truly understand causality? InProceedings of the AAAI Symposium...

2024
[278]

Artificialintelligencecanpersuadehumans on political issues.Osf, 2023

HuiBai, JanVoelkel, JohannesEichstaedt, andRobbWiller. Artificialintelligencecanpersuadehumans on political issues.Osf, 2023

2023
[279]

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. U.S. Senate statewide 1976–2020.Harvard Dataverse, 2017

1976
[280]

MIT Election Data and Science Lab. U.S. House 1976–2022.Harvard Dataverse, 2017. 53 Political-LLM

1976
[281]

Federal Register Final Rule Data 2000-2014.Harvard Dataverse, 2018

Emily Moore. Federal Register Final Rule Data 2000-2014.Harvard Dataverse, 2018

2000
[282]

What makes a high-quality training dataset for large language models: A practitioners’ perspective

Xiao Yu, Zexian Zhang, Feifei Niu, Xing Hu, Xin Xia, and John Grundy. What makes a high-quality training dataset for large language models: A practitioners’ perspective. InProceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pages 656–668, 2024

2024
[283]

Designing domain-specific large language models: The critical role of fine-tuning in public opinion simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.19308, 2024

Haocheng Lin. Designing domain-specific large language models: The critical role of fine-tuning in public opinion simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.19308, 2024

2024 arXiv
[284]

Selective annotation via data allocation: These data should be triaged to experts for annotation rather than the model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12081, 2024

Chen Huang, Yang Deng, Wenqiang Lei, Jiancheng Lv, and Ido Dagan. Selective annotation via data allocation: These data should be triaged to experts for annotation rather than the model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12081, 2024

2024 arXiv
[285]

Comparisonoftextpreprocessingmethods

ChristinePChai. Comparisonoftextpreprocessingmethods. NaturalLanguageEngineering ,29(3):509– 553, 2023

2023
[286]

Named entity recognition and classification in historical documents: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys, 56(2):1–47, 2023

MaudEhrmann,AhmedHamdi,ElvysLinharesPontes,MatteoRomanello,andAntoineDoucet. Named entity recognition and classification in historical documents: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys, 56(2):1–47, 2023

2023
[287]

Red and blue language: Word choices in the trump & harris 2024 presidential debate.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13654, 2024

Philipp Wicke and Marianna M Bolognesi. Red and blue language: Word choices in the trump & harris 2024 presidential debate.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13654, 2024

2024 arXiv
[288]

fake news

Maria D Molina, S Shyam Sundar, Thai Le, and Dongwon Lee. “fake news” is not simply false information: A concept explication and taxonomy of online content.American behavioral scientist, 65(2):180–212, 2021

2021
[289]

Ragar, your falsehood radar: Rag-augmented reasoning for political fact-checking using multimodal large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12065, 2024

M Abdul Khaliq, P Chang, M Ma, Bernhard Pflugfelder, and F Miletić. Ragar, your falsehood radar: Rag-augmented reasoning for political fact-checking using multimodal large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12065, 2024

2024 arXiv
[290]

Explaining anomalies detected by autoencoders using shapley additive explanations.Expert systems with applications, 186:115736, 2021

Liat Antwarg, Ronnie Mindlin Miller, Bracha Shapira, and Lior Rokach. Explaining anomalies detected by autoencoders using shapley additive explanations.Expert systems with applications, 186:115736, 2021

2021
[291]

Arigorousstudyofintegratedgradients methodandextensionstointernalneuronattributions

DanielDLundstrom,TianjianHuang,andMeisamRazaviyayn. Arigorousstudyofintegratedgradients methodandextensionstointernalneuronattributions. In InternationalConferenceonMachineLearning , pages 14485–14508. PMLR, 2022

2022
[292]

Semantic uncertainty: Linguistic invariances for uncertainty estimation in natural language generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09664, 2023

Lorenz Kuhn, Yarin Gal, and Sebastian Farquhar. Semantic uncertainty: Linguistic invariances for uncertainty estimation in natural language generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09664, 2023

2023 arXiv
[293]

Llm uncertainty quantification through directional entailment graph and claim level response augmentation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00994, 2024

Longchao Da, Tiejin Chen, Lu Cheng, and Hua Wei. Llm uncertainty quantification through directional entailment graph and claim level response augmentation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00994, 2024

2024 arXiv
[294]

Generating with confidence: Uncertainty quantification for black-box large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.19187, 2023

Zhen Lin, Shubhendu Trivedi, and Jimeng Sun. Generating with confidence: Uncertainty quantification for black-box large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.19187, 2023. 54

2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [21]

Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples

Lisa P Argyle, Ethan C Busby, Nancy Fulda, Joshua R Gubler, Christopher Rytting, and David Wingate. Outofone,many: Usinglanguagemodelstosimulatehumansamples. PoliticalAnalysis,31(3):337–351, 2023

2023

[2] [142]

Synthetic replacements for human survey data? the perils of large language models.Political Analysis, pages 1–16, 2024

James Bisbee, Joshua D Clinton, Cassy Dorff, Brenton Kenkel, and Jennifer M Larson. Synthetic replacements for human survey data? the perils of large language models.Political Analysis, pages 1–16, 2024

2024

[3] [1]

Theshakyfoundationsoflargelanguagemodelsandfoundation models for electronic health records.npj Digital Medicine, 6(1):135, 2023

Michael Wornow, Yizhe Xu, Rahul Thapa, Birju Patel, Ethan Steinberg, Scott Fleming, Michael A Pfeffer,JasonFries,andNigamHShah. Theshakyfoundationsoflargelanguagemodelsandfoundation models for electronic health records.npj Digital Medicine, 6(1):135, 2023

2023

[4] [2]

Are large language models ready for healthcare? a comparative study on clinical language understanding

Yuqing Wang, Yun Zhao, and Linda Petzold. Are large language models ready for healthcare? a comparative study on clinical language understanding. InMachine Learning for Healthcare Conference, pages 804–823. PMLR, 2023

2023

[5] [3]

Retrieval-reasoning large language model-based synthetic clinical trial generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12476, 2024

Zerui Xu, Fang Wu, Tianfan Fu, and Yue Zhao. Retrieval-reasoning large language model-based synthetic clinical trial generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12476, 2024

arXiv 2024

[6] [4]

Clinicalagent: Clinical trial multi-agent with large language model-based reasoning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14777, 2024

Ling Yue, Sixue Xing, Jintai Chen, and Tianfan Fu. Clinicalagent: Clinical trial multi-agent with large language model-based reasoning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14777, 2024. 38 Political-LLM

arXiv 2024

[7] [5]

Finbert: A large language model for extracting information from financial text.Contemporary Accounting Research, 40(2):806–841, 2023

Allen H Huang, Hui Wang, and Yi Yang. Finbert: A large language model for extracting information from financial text.Contemporary Accounting Research, 40(2):806–841, 2023

2023

[8] [6]

Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance

Shĳie Wu, Ozan Irsoy, Steven Lu, Vadim Dabravolski, Mark Dredze, Sebastian Gehrmann, Prabhanjan Kambadur, David Rosenberg, and Gideon Mann. Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564, 2023

arXiv 2023