Fearful Falcons and Angry Llamas: Emotion Category Annotations of Arguments by Humans and LLMs

Arguments evoke emotions, influencing the effect of the argument itself. Not only the emotional intensity but also the category influence the argument's effects, for instance, the willingness to adapt stances. While binary emotionality has been studied in arguments, there is no work on discrete emotion categories (e.g., "Anger") in such data. To fill this gap, we crowdsource subjective annotations of emotion categories in a German argument corpus and evaluate automatic LLM-based labeling methods. Specifically, we compare three prompting strategies (zero-shot, one-shot, chain-of-thought) on three large instruction-tuned language models (Falcon-7b-instruct, Llama-3.1-8B-instruct, GPT-4o-mini). We further vary the definition of the output space to be binary (is there emotionality in the argument?), closed-domain (which emotion from a given label set is in the argument?), or open-domain (which emotion is in the argument?). We find that emotion categories enhance the prediction of emotionality in arguments, emphasizing the need for discrete emotion annotations in arguments. Across all prompt settings and models, automatic predictions show a high recall but low precision for predicting anger and fear, indicating a strong bias toward negative emotions.

iPrOp: Interactive Prompt Optimization for Large Language Models with a Human in the Loop

Prompt engineering has made significant contributions to the era of large language models, yet its effectiveness depends on the skills of a prompt author. Automatic prompt optimization can support the prompt development process, but requires annotated data. This paper introduces $\textit{iPrOp}$, a novel Interactive Prompt Optimization system, to bridge manual prompt engineering and automatic prompt optimization. With human intervention in the optimization loop, $\textit{iPrOp}$ offers users the flexibility to assess evolving prompts. We present users with prompt variations, selected instances, large language model predictions accompanied by corresponding explanations, and performance metrics derived from a subset of the training data. This approach empowers users to choose and further refine the provided prompts based on their individual preferences and needs. This system not only assists non-technical domain experts in generating optimal prompts tailored to their specific tasks or domains, but also enables to study the intrinsic parameters that influence the performance of prompt optimization. Our evaluation shows that our system has the capability to generate improved prompts, leading to enhanced task performance.

MOPO: Multi-Objective Prompt Optimization for Affective Text Generation

How emotions are expressed depends on the context and domain. On X (formerly Twitter), for instance, an author might simply use the hashtag #anger, while in a news headline, emotions are typically written in a more polite, indirect manner. To enable conditional text generation models to create emotionally connotated texts that fit a domain, users need to have access to a parameter that allows them to choose the appropriate way to express an emotion. To achieve this, we introduce MOPO, a Multi-Objective Prompt Optimization methodology. MOPO optimizes prompts according to multiple objectives (which correspond here to the output probabilities assigned by emotion classifiers trained for different domains). In contrast to single objective optimization, MOPO outputs a set of prompts, each with a different weighting of the multiple objectives. Users can then choose the most appropriate prompt for their context. We evaluate MOPO using three objectives, determined by various domain-specific emotion classifiers. MOPO improves performance by up to 15 pp across all objectives with a minimal loss (1-2 pp) for any single objective compared to single-objective optimization. These minor performance losses are offset by a broader generalization across multiple objectives - which is not possible with single-objective optimization. Additionally, MOPO reduces computational requirements by simultaneously optimizing for multiple objectives, eliminating separate optimization procedures for each objective.

Self-Adaptive Paraphrasing and Preference Learning for Improved Claim Verifiability

In fact-checking, structure and phrasing of claims critically influence a model's ability to predict verdicts accurately. Social media content in particular rarely serves as optimal input for verification systems, which necessitates pre-processing to extract the claim from noisy context before fact checking. Prior work suggests extracting a claim representation that humans find to be checkworthy and verifiable. This has two limitations: (1) the format may not be optimal for a fact-checking model, and (2), it requires annotated data to learn the extraction task from. We address both issues and propose a method to extract claims that is not reliant on labeled training data. Instead, our self-adaptive approach only requires a black-box fact checking model and a generative language model (LM). Given a tweet, we iteratively optimize the LM to generate a claim paraphrase that increases the performance of a fact checking model. By learning from preference pairs, we align the LM to the fact checker using direct preference optimization. We show that this novel setup extracts a claim paraphrase that is more verifiable than their original social media formulations, and is on par with competitive baselines. For refuted claims, our method consistently outperforms all baselines.

Regular-pattern-sensitive CRFs for Distant Label Interactions

Linear-chain conditional random fields (CRFs) are a common model component for sequence labeling tasks when modeling the interactions between different labels is important. However, the Markov assumption limits linear-chain CRFs to only directly modeling interactions between adjacent labels. Weighted finite-state transducers (FSTs) are a related approach which can be made to model distant label-label interactions, but exact label inference is intractable for these models in the general case, and the task of selecting an appropriate automaton structure for the desired interaction types poses a practical challenge. In this work, we present regular-pattern-sensitive CRFs (RPCRFs), a method of enriching standard linear-chain CRFs with the ability to learn long-distance label interactions which occur in user-specified patterns. This approach allows users to write regular-expression label patterns concisely specifying which types of interactions the model should take into account, allowing the model to learn from data whether and in which contexts these patterns occur. The result can be interpreted alternatively as a CRF augmented with additional, non-local potentials, or as a finite-state transducer whose structure is defined by a set of easily-interpretable patterns. Critically, unlike the general case for FSTs (and for non-chain CRFs), exact training and inference are tractable for many pattern sets. In this work, we detail how a RPCRF can be automatically constructed from a set of user-specified patterns, and demonstrate the model's effectiveness on synthetic data, showing how different types of patterns can capture different nonlocal dependency structures in label sequences.

Which Demographics do LLMs Default to During Annotation?

Demographics and cultural background of annotators influence the labels they assign in text annotation -- for instance, an elderly woman might find it offensive to read a message addressed to a "bro", but a male teenager might find it appropriate. It is therefore important to acknowledge label variations to not under-represent members of a society. Two research directions developed out of this observation in the context of using large language models (LLM) for data annotations, namely (1) studying biases and inherent knowledge of LLMs and (2) injecting diversity in the output by manipulating the prompt with demographic information. We combine these two strands of research and ask the question to which demographics an LLM resorts to when no demographics is given. To answer this question, we evaluate which attributes of human annotators LLMs inherently mimic. Furthermore, we compare non-demographic conditioned prompts and placebo-conditioned prompts (e.g., "you are an annotator who lives in house number 5") to demographics-conditioned prompts ("You are a 45 year old man and an expert on politeness annotation. How do you rate {instance}"). We study these questions for politeness and offensiveness annotations on the POPQUORN data set, a corpus created in a controlled manner to investigate human label variations based on demographics which has not been used for LLM-based analyses so far. We observe notable influences related to gender, race, and age in demographic prompting, which contrasts with previous studies that found no such effects.

How Entangled is Factuality and Deception in German?

The statement "The earth is flat" is factually inaccurate, but if someone truly believes and argues in its favor, it is not deceptive. Research on deception detection and fact checking often conflates factual accuracy with the truthfulness of statements. This assumption makes it difficult to (a) study subtle distinctions and interactions between the two and (b) gauge their effects on downstream tasks. The belief-based deception framework disentangles these properties by defining texts as deceptive when there is a mismatch between what people say and what they truly believe. In this study, we assess if presumed patterns of deception generalize to German language texts. We test the effectiveness of computational models in detecting deception using an established corpus of belief-based argumentation. Finally, we gauge the impact of deception on the downstream task of fact checking and explore if this property confounds verification models. Surprisingly, our analysis finds no correlation with established cues of deception. Previous work claimed that computational models can outperform humans in deception detection accuracy, however, our experiments show that both traditional and state-of-the-art models struggle with the task, performing no better than random guessing. For fact checking, we find that Natural Language Inference-based verification performs worse on non-factual and deceptive content, while prompting Large Language Models for the same task is less sensitive to these properties.

Prompt-based Personality Profiling: Reinforcement Learning for Relevance Filtering

Author profiling is the task of inferring characteristics about individuals by analyzing content they share. Supervised machine learning still dominates automatic systems that perform this task, despite the popularity of prompting large language models to address natural language understanding tasks. One reason is that the classification instances consist of large amounts of posts, potentially a whole user profile, which may exceed the input length of Transformers. Even if a model can use a large context window, the entirety of posts makes the application of API-accessed black box systems costly and slow, next to issues which come with such "needle-in-the-haystack" tasks. To mitigate this limitation, we propose a new method for author profiling which aims at distinguishing relevant from irrelevant content first, followed by the actual user profiling only with relevant data. To circumvent the need for relevance-annotated data, we optimize this relevance filter via reinforcement learning with a reward function that utilizes the zero-shot capabilities of large language models. We evaluate our method for Big Five personality trait prediction on two Twitter corpora. On publicly available real-world data with a skewed label distribution, our method shows similar efficacy to using all posts in a user profile, but with a substantially shorter context. An evaluation on a version of these data balanced with artificial posts shows that the filtering to relevant posts leads to a significantly improved accuracy of the predictions.

Entity-Level Sentiment: More than the Sum of Its Parts

In sentiment analysis of longer texts, there may be a variety of topics discussed, of entities mentioned, and of sentiments expressed regarding each entity. We find a lack of studies exploring how such texts express their sentiment towards each entity of interest, and how these sentiments can be modelled. In order to better understand how sentiment regarding persons and organizations (each entity in our scope) is expressed in longer texts, we have collected a dataset of expert annotations where the overall sentiment regarding each entity is identified, together with the sentence-level sentiment for these entities separately. We show that the reader's perceived sentiment regarding an entity often differs from an arithmetic aggregation of sentiments at the sentence level. Only 70\% of the positive and 55\% of the negative entities receive a correct overall sentiment label when we aggregate the (human-annotated) sentiment labels for the sentences where the entity is mentioned. Our dataset reveals the complexity of entity-specific sentiment in longer texts, and allows for more precise modelling and evaluation of such sentiment expressions.

"You are an expert annotator": Automatic Best-Worst-Scaling Annotations for Emotion Intensity Modeling

Labeling corpora constitutes a bottleneck to create models for new tasks or domains. Large language models mitigate the issue with automatic corpus labeling methods, particularly for categorical annotations. Some NLP tasks such as emotion intensity prediction, however, require text regression, but there is no work on automating annotations for continuous label assignments. Regression is considered more challenging than classification: The fact that humans perform worse when tasked to choose values from a rating scale lead to comparative annotation methods, including best-worst scaling. This raises the question if large language model-based annotation methods show similar patterns, namely that they perform worse on rating scale annotation tasks than on comparative annotation tasks. To study this, we automate emotion intensity predictions and compare direct rating scale predictions, pairwise comparisons and best-worst scaling. We find that the latter shows the highest reliability. A transformer regressor fine-tuned on these data performs nearly on par with a model trained on the original manual annotations.