Calibrated LLM annotation and encoder transfer for measuring human values in social media text
A new arXiv preprint investigates how different LLMs, prompts, and instruction languages operationalize Schwartz's theory of basic human values when annotating non-English social media posts. The authors evaluate annotation quality beyond standard F1 metrics, examining structural alignment, error structure, and confidence-ambiguity relations, finding that iterative prompt calibration reduces misattributions. They also demonstrate that LLM annotations can be transferred to a smaller encoder model via soft-label training, preserving theory-grounded value interpretations and uncertainty information.
Related guides (2)
Related events (8)
Systematic Study of Schwartz Value Detection in Political Texts: Context, Scale, and Moral Knowledge
This paper investigates when additional context, larger models, or retrieved moral knowledge improve detection of Schwartz human values in political text using the ValueEval benchmark format. Key findings show that full-document context helps supervised DeBERTa encoders (+3.8–4.8 macro-F1) but not zero-shot LLMs, while RAG with a curated moral knowledge base consistently benefits all model families under early fusion. Scaling model size does not guarantee gains, and simple early fusion outperforms more complex RAG variants. The study recommends jointly evaluating context, knowledge, and model family rather than assuming larger inputs or models universally improve value-sensitive NLP.
LLMs fail to consistently simulate demographic perspective-taking in hate speech annotation
A new arXiv paper evaluates whether persona-conditioned LLMs can replicate how different demographic groups perceive hate speech, testing three dimensions: inter-group disagreement, in-group sensitivity, and vicarious prediction. No model consistently captures all three dimensions, and performance is highly model-dependent rather than emerging reliably from identity prompts alone. Vicarious prompting with Llama 3.1 provides the closest approximation to human disagreement patterns across demographic axes. The findings have implications for using LLMs as proxies for diverse human annotators in content moderation tasks.
Moral Semantics Survive Machine Translation: Cross-Lingual Evidence from Moral Foundations Corpora
This paper investigates whether LLM-based machine translation can preserve moral semantic content well enough to enable cross-lingual moral values classification, using Polish as a test case with ~50k annotated social media posts. A four-method validation pipeline (LaBSE embedding similarity, CKA, LLM-as-judge, and classifier parity) shows mean cosine similarity of 0.86 and AUC gaps of only 0.01–0.02 across Moral Foundations categories. The results suggest machine translation is a practical path to extending moral values NLP research to under-resourced languages, with expected generalization to related Slavic languages.
Language models linearly encode a 'value axis' tracking expected goal success, study finds
Researchers construct a 'value axis' in Qwen3-8B's activation space using synthetic in-context RL data, finding that this axis distinguishes high vs. low confidence, backtracking vs. non-backtracking rollouts, and correct vs. corrupted code. Steering along this axis causally modulates self-correction behavior and verbosity, while DPO training shifts the internal value of rewarded behaviors. Applied to real-world settings, the axis reveals that Qwen assigns low internal value to politically sensitive queries post-training and that SFT increases domain-specific confidence. The findings suggest LLMs linearly encode an estimate of expected goal success that shapes their generative behavior.
Text Analytics Evaluation Framework: Benchmarking LLMs on Social Media NLP Tasks
Researchers introduce a 470-question evaluation framework to assess LLM performance on aggregated social media text, applied to Twitter datasets across sentiment analysis, hate speech detection, and emotion recognition. Results show performance degrades substantially as input scale exceeds 500 instances, particularly for open-weights models on numerical tasks. Multi-label and target-dependent scenarios also show notable performance drops, and task complexity progressively erodes accuracy from basic semantic identification to comparison and counting operations. The findings point to architectural bottlenecks in current LLMs for rigorous quantitative analysis over large text collections.
WhoSaidIt: Human-LLM Collaborative Annotation for Multilingual Speaker-Attribute Classification
This paper proposes a human-LLM collaborative re-annotation framework for stabilizing noisy multilingual speaker-attribute labels under resource constraints. LLMs surface recurring annotation rationales through iterative expert interaction, combined with disagreement-focused sampling for targeted re-annotation. The resulting WhoSaidIt dataset covers nine speaker-attribute labels across multiple languages. Benchmarking of recent LLMs reveals substantial cross-lingual annotation divergence and highlights both capabilities and limitations of LLMs in this classification task.
Mechanistic analysis of how LLMs encode essay quality in internal representations
Researchers systematically probe the hidden representations of eight LLMs across three essay datasets (ASAP++, CSEE, ENEM) to understand how automated essay scoring (AES) works internally. Using linear probing, dimensionality reduction, and neuron-level analysis, they find essay quality is encoded in a linearly accessible form that emerges progressively across layers and partially transfers across prompts. Individual 'essay scoring neurons' are identified whose activations correlate with scores and respond to targeted interventions, with longer essays relying more on deeper layers. The work contributes to mechanistic interpretability of LLM-based scoring systems.
LLUMI: Fine-Tuning Open-Source LLMs for Mental Health Writing Assistance Using Reddit Community Feedback
LLUMI is a two-component system (a generation model and an improvement model) designed to provide mental health writing assistance using smaller open-source LLMs hosted in privacy-preserving, on-premise environments. The system leverages Reddit community endorsement signals (upvotes/downvotes) to construct preference pairs for SFT and DPO training, then further aligns outputs via human evaluation across readability, empathy, connection, actionability, and safety dimensions. Results show LLUMI achieves performance comparable to proprietary GPT-based models on linguistic and human evaluations, suggesting community-derived preference signals can substitute for expensive expert labeling in sensitive domains.