arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2409.09741cs.CLcs.AI
收藏

政治内容文本标注中的大语言模型基准测试:基于毒性与不文明行为数据的概念验证

Benchmarking LLMs in Political Content Text-Annotation: Proof-of-Concept with Toxicity and Incivility Data

Leiden University(莱顿大学);Universidad Diego Portales(迭戈波塔利斯大学)

Bastián González-Bustamante

AI总结:

本研究针对政治内容文本标注任务构建基准,测试多款LLM与Perspective算法的表现,发现特定模型性能优异,小参数量开源模型性价比高,且仅开源模型可保障标注完全可复现。

摘要:

本文对OpenAI的GPT系列模型及多款开源LLM开展政治内容标注任务的能力进行了基准测试。我们使用了一个包含超300万条数字互动内容的新型抗议事件数据集,并构建了金标准数据集,其中包含由人类标注员标注的社交媒体毒性与不文明行为的真实标签。本次基准测试纳入了Google的Perspective算法,该算法与GPT系列模型均通过各自的API调用,而开源LLM则在本地部署。研究结果显示,采用更宽松阈值的Perspective API、GPT-4o以及Nous Hermes 2 Mixtral在零样本分类标注表现上优于其他LLM。此外,参数量更小的Nous Hermes 2与Mistral OpenOrca也能以高性能完成该任务,是在性能、部署成本与计算时间之间取得良好平衡的理想选择。通过设置不同温度水平的实验得到的辅助结果表明,尽管GPT系列模型不仅计算速度快,整体可靠性也较高,但只有开源LLM能确保标注结果的完全可复现性。

英文摘要:

This article benchmarked the ability of OpenAI's GPTs and a number of open-source LLMs to perform annotation tasks on political content. We used a novel protest event dataset comprising more than three million digital interactions and created a gold standard that includes ground-truth labels annotated by human coders about toxicity and incivility on social media. We included in our benchmark Google's Perspective algorithm, which, along with GPTs, was employed throughout their respective APIs while the open-source LLMs were deployed locally. The findings show that Perspective API using a laxer threshold, GPT-4o, and Nous Hermes 2 Mixtral outperform other LLM's zero-shot classification annotations. In addition, Nous Hermes 2 and Mistral OpenOrca, with a smaller number of parameters, are able to perform the task with high performance, being attractive options that could offer good trade-offs between performance, implementing costs and computing time. Ancillary findings using experiments setting different temperature levels show that although GPTs tend to show not only excellent computing time but also overall good levels of reliability, only open-source LLMs ensure full reproducibility in the annotation.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑