Using LLMs to Establish Implicit User Sentiment of Software Desirability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.01527v2
• Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2024 19:59:06 GMT
• Title: Using LLMs to Establish Implicit User Sentiment of Software Desirability
• Authors: Sherri Weitl-Harms, John D. Hastings, Jonah Lum,
• Abstract summary: This study explores the use of LLMs for providing quantitative zero-shot sentiment analysis of implicit software desirability. Data is collected using the Microsoft Product Desirability Toolkit (PDT), a well-known qualitative user experience analysis tool.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: This study explores the use of LLMs for providing quantitative zero-shot sentiment analysis of implicit software desirability, addressing a critical challenge in product evaluation where traditional review scores, though convenient, fail to capture the richness of qualitative user feedback. Innovations include establishing a method that 1) works with qualitative user experience data without the need for explicit review scores, 2) focuses on implicit user satisfaction, and 3) provides scaled numerical sentiment analysis, offering a more nuanced understanding of user sentiment, instead of simply classifying sentiment as positive, neutral, or negative. Data is collected using the Microsoft Product Desirability Toolkit (PDT), a well-known qualitative user experience analysis tool. For initial exploration, the PDT metric was given to users of two software systems. PDT data was fed through several LLMs (Claude Sonnet 3 and 3.5, GPT4, and GPT4o) and through a leading transfer learning technique, Twitter-Roberta-Base-Sentiment, and Vader, a leading sentiment analysis tool. Each system was asked to evaluate the data in two ways, by looking at the sentiment expressed in the PDT word/explanation pairs; and by looking at the sentiment expressed by the users in their grouped selection of five words and explanations, as a whole. Each LLM provided a sentiment score, its confidence (low, medium, high) in the score, and an explanation of the score. All LLMs tested were able to statistically detect user sentiment from the users' grouped data, whereas TRBS and Vader were not. The confidence and explanation of confidence provided by the LLMs assisted in understanding user sentiment. This study adds deeper understanding of evaluating user experiences, toward the goal of creating a universal tool that quantifies implicit sentiment.

Related papers

• CIBench: Evaluating Your LLMs with a Code Interpreter Plugin [68.95137938214862]
  We propose an interactive evaluation framework, named CIBench, to comprehensively assess LLMs' ability to utilize code interpreters for data science tasks. The evaluation dataset is constructed using an LLM-human cooperative approach and simulates an authentic workflow by leveraging consecutive and interactive IPython sessions. We conduct extensive experiments to analyze the ability of 24 LLMs on CIBench and provide valuable insights for future LLMs in code interpreter utilization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T07:43:55Z)
• Large Language Models as Evaluators for Recommendation Explanations [23.938202791437337]
  We investigate whether LLMs can serve as evaluators of recommendation explanations. We design and apply a 3-level meta evaluation strategy to measure the correlation between evaluator labels and the ground truth provided by users. Our study verifies that utilizing LLMs as evaluators can be an accurate, reproducible and cost-effective solution for evaluating recommendation explanation texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T13:23:23Z)
• CLAMBER: A Benchmark of Identifying and Clarifying Ambiguous Information Needs in Large Language Models [60.59638232596912]
  We introduce CLAMBER, a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) Building upon the taxonomy, we construct 12K high-quality data to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks of various off-the-shelf LLMs. Our findings indicate the limited practical utility of current LLMs in identifying and clarifying ambiguous user queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-20T14:34:01Z)
• Interactive Analysis of LLMs using Meaningful Counterfactuals [22.755345889167934]
  Counterfactual examples are useful for exploring the decision boundaries of machine learning models. How can we apply counterfactual-based methods to analyze and explain LLMs? We propose a novel algorithm for generating batches of complete and meaningful textual counterfactuals. In our experiments, 97.2% of the counterfactuals are grammatically correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T19:57:03Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation of Dialogue Systems: Effects of User Feedback on Crowdworkers and LLMs [57.16442740983528]
  In ad-hoc retrieval, evaluation relies heavily on user actions, including implicit feedback. The role of user feedback in annotators' assessment of turns in a conversational perception has been little studied. We focus on how the evaluation of task-oriented dialogue systems ( TDSs) is affected by considering user feedback, explicit or implicit, as provided through the follow-up utterance of a turn being evaluated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T16:45:50Z)
• Interpretable User Satisfaction Estimation for Conversational Systems with Large Language Models [35.95405294377247]
  Existing approaches based on featurized ML models or text embeddings fall short in extracting generalizable patterns. We show that LLMs can extract interpretable signals of user satisfaction from their natural language utterances more effectively than embedding-based approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-19T02:57:07Z)
• Can LLMs Generate Human-Like Wayfinding Instructions? Towards Platform-Agnostic Embodied Instruction Synthesis [51.04181562775778]
  We present a novel approach to automatically synthesize "wayfinding instructions" for an embodied robot agent. Our algorithm uses in-context learning to condition an LLM to generate instructions using just a few references. We implement our approach on multiple simulation platforms including Matterport3D, AI Habitat and ThreeDWorld.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T05:38:07Z)
• MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedback [78.60644407028022]
  We introduce MINT, a benchmark that evaluates large language models' ability to solve tasks with multi-turn interactions. LLMs generally benefit from tools and language feedback, with performance gains of 1-8% for each turn of tool use. LLMs evaluated, supervised instruction-finetuning (SIFT) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) generally hurt multi-turn capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-19T15:25:42Z)
• SIFN: A Sentiment-aware Interactive Fusion Network for Review-based Item Recommendation [48.1799451277808]
  We propose a Sentiment-aware Interactive Fusion Network (SIFN) for review-based item recommendation. We first encode user/item reviews via BERT and propose a light-weighted sentiment learner to extract semantic features of each review. Then, we propose a sentiment prediction task that guides the sentiment learner to extract sentiment-aware features via explicit sentiment labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-18T08:04:38Z)
• SentiLSTM: A Deep Learning Approach for Sentiment Analysis of Restaurant Reviews [13.018530502810128]
  This paper proposes, a deep learning-based technique (i.e., BiLSTM) to classify the reviews provided by the clients of the restaurant into positive and negative polarities. The results of the evaluation on test dataset show that BiLSTM technique produced in the highest accuracy of 91.35%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-19T06:24:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.