Says Who? Effective Zero-Shot Annotation of Focalization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.11390v1
• Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:50:15 GMT
• Title: Says Who? Effective Zero-Shot Annotation of Focalization
• Authors: Rebecca M. M. Hicke, Yuri Bizzoni, Pascale Feldkamp, Ross Deans Kristensen-McLachlan,
• Abstract summary: Focalization, the perspective through which narrative is presented, is encoded via a wide range of lexico-grammatical features. We provide experiments to test how well contemporary Large Language Models (LLMs) perform when annotating literary texts for focalization mode.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Focalization, the perspective through which narrative is presented, is encoded via a wide range of lexico-grammatical features and is subject to reader interpretation. Moreover, trained readers regularly disagree on interpretations, suggesting that this problem may be computationally intractable. In this paper, we provide experiments to test how well contemporary Large Language Models (LLMs) perform when annotating literary texts for focalization mode. Despite the challenging nature of the task, LLMs show comparable performance to trained human annotators in our experiments. We provide a case study working with the novels of Stephen King to demonstrate the usefulness of this approach for computational literary studies, illustrating how focalization can be studied at scale.

Related papers

• Inductive Linguistic Reasoning with Large Language Models [0.0]
  We investigate the abilities of large language models to perform abstract multilingual reasoning through the lens of linguistic puzzles. We employ a two-stage procedure, first generating analogical exemplars with a language model, and then applying them in-context. Our results on the modeLing dataset show that analogical prompting is effective in eliciting models' knowledge of language grammar similarities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T03:37:11Z)
• A Bayesian Approach to Harnessing the Power of LLMs in Authorship Attribution [57.309390098903]
  Authorship attribution aims to identify the origin or author of a document. Large Language Models (LLMs) with their deep reasoning capabilities and ability to maintain long-range textual associations offer a promising alternative. Our results on the IMDb and blog datasets show an impressive 85% accuracy in one-shot authorship classification across ten authors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T04:14:23Z)
• Causal Micro-Narratives [62.47217054314046]
  We present a novel approach to classify causal micro-narratives from text. These narratives are sentence-level explanations of the cause(s) and/or effect(s) of a target subject.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T17:55:10Z)
• Unveiling Narrative Reasoning Limits of Large Language Models with Trope in Movie Synopses [66.7212332602784]
  Large language models equipped with chain-of-thoughts (CoT) prompting have shown significant multi-step reasoning capabilities. This study utilizes tropes in movie synopses to assess the abstract reasoning abilities of state-of-the-art LLMs. We introduce a trope-wise querying approach to address these challenges and boost the F1 score by 11.8 points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-22T05:50:18Z)
• Paired Completion: Flexible Quantification of Issue-framing at Scale with LLMs [0.41436032949434404]
  We develop and rigorously evaluate new detection methods for issue framing and narrative analysis within large text datasets. We show that issue framing can be reliably and efficiently detected in large corpora with only a few examples of either perspective on a given issue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T07:14:15Z)
• Can GPT-4 learn to analyse moves in research article abstracts? [0.9999629695552195]
  We employ the affordances of GPT-4 to automate the annotation process by using natural language prompts. An 8-shot prompt was more effective than one using two, confirming that the inclusion of examples illustrating areas of variability can enhance GPT-4's ability to recognize multiple moves in a single sentence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-22T13:14:27Z)
• Reading Subtext: Evaluating Large Language Models on Short Story Summarization with Writers [25.268709339109893]
  We evaluate recent Large Language Models (LLMs) on the challenging task of summarizing short stories. We work directly with authors to ensure that the stories have not been shared online (and therefore are unseen by the models) We compare GPT-4, Claude-2.1, and LLama-2-70B and find that all three models make faithfulness mistakes in over 50% of summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T01:52:14Z)
• Visual In-Context Learning for Large Vision-Language Models [62.5507897575317]
  In Large Visual Language Models (LVLMs) the efficacy of In-Context Learning (ICL) remains limited by challenges in cross-modal interactions and representation disparities. We introduce a novel Visual In-Context Learning (VICL) method comprising Visual Demonstration Retrieval, Intent-Oriented Image Summarization, and Intent-Oriented Demonstration Composition. Our approach retrieves images via ''Retrieval & Rerank'' paradigm, summarises images with task intent and task-specific visual parsing, and composes language-based demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T12:43:38Z)
• Pixel Sentence Representation Learning [67.4775296225521]
  In this work, we conceptualize the learning of sentence-level textual semantics as a visual representation learning process. We employ visually-grounded text perturbation methods like typos and word order shuffling, resonating with human cognitive patterns, and enabling perturbation to be perceived as continuous. Our approach is further bolstered by large-scale unsupervised topical alignment training and natural language inference supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T02:46:45Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Model Creativity from a Literary Perspective [13.672268920902187]
  This paper assesses the potential for large language models to serve as assistive tools in the creative writing process. We develop interactive and multi-voice prompting strategies that interleave background descriptions, instructions that guide composition, samples of text in the target style, and critical discussion of the given samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-30T16:46:25Z)
• SOUL: Towards Sentiment and Opinion Understanding of Language [96.74878032417054]
  We propose a new task called Sentiment and Opinion Understanding of Language (SOUL) SOUL aims to evaluate sentiment understanding through two subtasks: Review (RC) and Justification Generation (JG)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-27T06:48:48Z)
• "You Are An Expert Linguistic Annotator": Limits of LLMs as Analyzers of Abstract Meaning Representation [60.863629647985526]
  We examine the successes and limitations of the GPT-3, ChatGPT, and GPT-4 models in analysis of sentence meaning structure. We find that models can reliably reproduce the basic format of AMR, and can often capture core event, argument, and modifier structure. Overall, our findings indicate that these models out-of-the-box can capture aspects of semantic structure, but there remain key limitations in their ability to support fully accurate semantic analyses or parses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T21:47:59Z)
• MAGNIFICo: Evaluating the In-Context Learning Ability of Large Language Models to Generalize to Novel Interpretations [37.13707912132472]
  Humans possess a remarkable ability to assign novel interpretations to linguistic expressions. Large Language Models (LLMs) have a knowledge cutoff and are costly to finetune repeatedly. We systematically analyse the ability of LLMs to acquire novel interpretations using in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T00:02:38Z)
• Distractor generation for multiple-choice questions with predictive prompting and large language models [21.233186754403093]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated remarkable performance across various tasks. We propose a strategy for guiding LLMs in generating relevant distractors by prompting them with question items automatically retrieved from a question bank. We found that on average 53% of the generated distractors presented to the teachers were rated as high-quality, i.e., suitable for immediate use as is.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-30T23:15:28Z)
• Revisiting the Roles of "Text" in Text Games [102.22750109468652]
  This paper investigates the roles of text in the face of different reinforcement learning challenges. We propose a simple scheme to extract relevant contextual information into an approximate state hash. Such a lightweight plug-in achieves competitive performance with state-of-the-art text agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-15T21:52:39Z)
• Conditional Supervised Contrastive Learning for Fair Text Classification [59.813422435604025]
  We study learning fair representations that satisfy a notion of fairness known as equalized odds for text classification via contrastive learning. Specifically, we first theoretically analyze the connections between learning representations with a fairness constraint and conditional supervised contrastive objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T17:38:30Z)
• Testing the Ability of Language Models to Interpret Figurative Language [69.59943454934799]
  Figurative and metaphorical language are commonplace in discourse. It remains an open question to what extent modern language models can interpret nonliteral phrases. We introduce Fig-QA, a Winograd-style nonliteral language understanding task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T23:42:22Z)
• RELIC: Retrieving Evidence for Literary Claims [29.762552250403544]
  We use a large-scale dataset of 78K literary quotations to formulate the novel task of literary evidence retrieval. We implement a RoBERTa-based dense passage retriever for this task that outperforms existing pretrained information retrieval baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-18T16:56:08Z)
• Interpretable contrastive word mover's embedding [8.637680131017985]
  We show that a popular approach to the supervised embedding of documents for classification, namely, contrastive Word Mover's Embedding, can be significantly enhanced by adding interpretability. This interpretability is achieved by incorporating a clustering promoting mechanism into the contrastive loss.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-01T15:27:27Z)
• Probing as Quantifying the Inductive Bias of Pre-trained Representations [99.93552997506438]
  We present a novel framework for probing where the goal is to evaluate the inductive bias of representations for a particular task. We apply our framework to a series of token-, arc-, and sentence-level tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-15T22:01:16Z)

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.