Pragmatic Metacognitive Prompting Improves LLM Performance on Sarcasm Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.04509v1
• Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2024 07:16:30 GMT
• Title: Pragmatic Metacognitive Prompting Improves LLM Performance on Sarcasm Detection
• Authors: Joshua Lee, Wyatt Fong, Alexander Le, Sur Shah, Kevin Han, Kevin Zhu,
• Abstract summary: We introduce Pragmatic Metacognitive Prompting (PMP) to improve the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in sarcasm detection. Using state-of-the-art LLMs such as LLaMA-3-8B, GPT-4o, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet, PMP achieves state-of-the-art performance on GPT-4o. This study demonstrates that integrating pragmatic reasoning and metacognitive strategies into prompting significantly enhances LLMs' ability to detect sarcasm.
• Score: 40.493832682762246
• License:
• Abstract: Sarcasm detection is a significant challenge in sentiment analysis due to the nuanced and context-dependent nature of verbiage. We introduce Pragmatic Metacognitive Prompting (PMP) to improve the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in sarcasm detection, which leverages principles from pragmatics and reflection helping LLMs interpret implied meanings, consider contextual cues, and reflect on discrepancies to identify sarcasm. Using state-of-the-art LLMs such as LLaMA-3-8B, GPT-4o, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet, PMP achieves state-of-the-art performance on GPT-4o on MUStARD and SemEval2018. This study demonstrates that integrating pragmatic reasoning and metacognitive strategies into prompting significantly enhances LLMs' ability to detect sarcasm, offering a promising direction for future research in sentiment analysis.

Related papers

• Human-Readable Adversarial Prompts: An Investigation into LLM Vulnerabilities Using Situational Context [49.13497493053742]
  Previous research on LLM vulnerabilities often relied on nonsensical adversarial prompts, which were easily detectable by automated methods. We address this gap by focusing on human-readable adversarial prompts, a more realistic and potent threat. Our key contributions are situation-driven attacks leveraging movie scripts to create contextually relevant, human-readable prompts that successfully deceive LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T21:43:52Z)
• SarcasmBench: Towards Evaluating Large Language Models on Sarcasm Understanding [19.412462224847086]
  We present evaluations on six widely used benchmark datasets through different prompting approaches. GPT-4 consistently and significantly outperforms other LLMs across various prompting methods. Few-shot IO prompting method outperforms the other two methods: zero-shot IO and few-shot CoT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T03:59:51Z)
• RVISA: Reasoning and Verification for Implicit Sentiment Analysis [18.836998294161834]
  implicit sentiment analysis (ISA) poses a significant challenge with the absence of salient cue words in expressions. This study proposes RVISA, a two-stage reasoning framework that harnesses the generation ability of DO LLMs and the reasoning ability of ED LLMs to train an enhanced reasoner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T15:07:54Z)
• Can LLMs Understand the Implication of Emphasized Sentences in Dialogue? [64.72966061510375]
  Emphasis is a crucial component in human communication, which indicates the speaker's intention and implication beyond pure text in dialogue. This paper introduces Emphasized-Talk, a benchmark with emphasis-annotated dialogue samples capturing the implications of emphasis. We evaluate various Large Language Models (LLMs), both open-source and commercial, to measure their performance in understanding emphasis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T20:41:44Z)
• Can large language models understand uncommon meanings of common words? [30.527834781076546]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown significant advancements across diverse natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. Yet, lacking widely acknowledged testing mechanisms, answering whether LLMs are parrots or genuinely comprehend the world' remains unclear. This paper presents innovative construction of a Lexical Semantic dataset with novel evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:58:22Z)
• FAC$^2$E: Better Understanding Large Language Model Capabilities by Dissociating Language and Cognition [56.76951887823882]
  Large language models (LLMs) are primarily evaluated by overall performance on various text understanding and generation tasks. We present FAC$2$E, a framework for Fine-grAined and Cognition-grounded LLMs' Capability Evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T21:05:37Z)
• Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understanding [1.3654846342364308]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are unparalleled in their ability to generate grammatically correct, fluent text. This position paper critically assesses three points recurring in critiques of LLM capacities. We outline a pragmatic perspective on the issue of real' understanding and intentionality in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:51:04Z)
• Metacognitive Prompting Improves Understanding in Large Language Models [12.112914393948415]
  We introduce Metacognitive Prompting (MP), a strategy inspired by human introspective reasoning processes. We conduct experiments on four prevalent Large Language Models (LLMs) across ten natural language understanding (NLU) datasets. MP consistently outperforms existing prompting methods in both general and domain-specific NLU tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-10T05:10:17Z)
• Revisiting the Reliability of Psychological Scales on Large Language Models [62.57981196992073]
  This study aims to determine the reliability of applying personality assessments to Large Language Models. Analysis of 2,500 settings per model, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Gemini-Pro, and LLaMA-3.1, reveals that various LLMs show consistency in responses to the Big Five Inventory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T15:03:28Z)
• Red Teaming Language Model Detectors with Language Models [114.36392560711022]
  Large language models (LLMs) present significant safety and ethical risks if exploited by malicious users. Recent works have proposed algorithms to detect LLM-generated text and protect LLMs. We study two types of attack strategies: 1) replacing certain words in an LLM's output with their synonyms given the context; 2) automatically searching for an instructional prompt to alter the writing style of the generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T10:08:37Z)

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.