To Err Is Human; To Annotate, SILICON? Reducing Measurement Error in LLM Annotation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.14461v3
• Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:12:35 GMT
• Title: To Err Is Human; To Annotate, SILICON? Reducing Measurement Error in LLM Annotation
• Authors: Xiang Cheng, Raveesh Mayya, João Sedoc,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) promise a cost-effective scalable alternative to human annotation.<n>We develop the SILICON methodology to systematically reduce measurement error from LLM annotation.<n>Our evidence indicates that reducing each error source is necessary, and that SILICON supports rigorous annotation in management research.
• Score: 11.470318058523466
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Unstructured text data annotation is foundational to management research and Large Language Models (LLMs) promise a cost-effective and scalable alternative to human annotation. The validity of insights drawn from LLM annotated data critically depends on minimizing the discrepancy between LLM assigned labels and the unobserved ground truth, as well as ensuring long-term reproducibility of results. We address the gap in the literature on LLM annotation by decomposing measurement error in LLM-based text annotation into four distinct sources: (1) guideline-induced error from inconsistent annotation criteria, (2) baseline-induced error from unreliable human reference standards, (3) prompt-induced error from suboptimal meta-instruction formatting, and (4) model-induced error from architectural differences across LLMs. We develop the SILICON methodology to systematically reduce measurement error from LLM annotation in all four sources above. Empirical validation across seven management research cases shows iteratively refined guidelines substantially increases the LLM-human agreement compared to one-shot guidelines; expert-generated baselines exhibit higher inter-annotator agreement as well as are less prone to producing misleading LLM-human agreement estimates compared to crowdsourced baselines; placing content in the system prompt reduces prompt-induced error; and model performance varies substantially across tasks. To further reduce error, we introduce a cost-effective multi-LLM labeling method, where only low-confidence items receive additional labels from alternative models. Finally, in addressing closed source model retirement cycles, we introduce an intuitive regression-based methodology to establish robust reproducibility protocols. Our evidence indicates that reducing each error source is necessary, and that SILICON supports reproducible, rigorous annotation in management research.

Related papers

• DiffuRank: Effective Document Reranking with Diffusion Language Models [71.16830004674513]
  We propose DiffuRank, a reranking framework built upon diffusion language models (dLLMs)<n>dLLMs support more flexible decoding and generation processes that are not constrained to a left-to-right order.<n>We show dLLMs achieve performance comparable to, and in some cases exceeding, that of autoregressive LLMs with similar model sizes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T02:18:14Z)
• Enhancing LLM-Based Data Annotation with Error Decomposition [6.6544828402388445]
  Large language models offer a scalable alternative to human coding for data annotation tasks.<n>Their performance on subjective annotation tasks is less consistent and more prone to errors.<n>We propose a diagnostic evaluation paradigm that incorporates a human-in-the-loop step to separate task-inherent ambiguity from model-driven inaccuracies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-17T05:43:17Z)
• Variance-Aware LLM Annotation for Strategy Research: Sources, Diagnostics, and a Protocol for Reliable Measurement [0.3228822469249803]
  Large language models (LLMs) offer strategy researchers powerful tools for annotating text at scale.<n>But treating LLM-generated labels as deterministic overlooks substantial instability.<n>We diagnose five variance sources: construct specification, interface effects, model preferences, output extraction, and system-level aggregation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-02T18:02:20Z)
• EVADE: LLM-Based Explanation Generation and Validation for Error Detection in NLI [36.91800117379075]
  EVADE is a framework for generating and validating explanations to detect errors using large language models.<n>HLV arises when multiple labels are valid for the same instance, making it difficult to separate annotation errors from plausible variation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T03:49:05Z)
• IDA-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Interactive Guided Data Analysis [60.32962597618861]
  IDA-Bench is a novel benchmark evaluating large language models in multi-round interactive scenarios.<n>Agent performance is judged by comparing its final numerical output to the human-derived baseline.<n>Even state-of-the-art coding agents (like Claude-3.7-thinking) succeed on 50% of the tasks, highlighting limitations not evident in single-turn tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T09:37:52Z)
• AI-Driven Scholarly Peer Review via Persistent Workflow Prompting, Meta-Prompting, and Meta-Reasoning [0.0]
  This report introduces Persistent Prompting (PWP), a potentially broadly applicable prompt engineering methodology.<n>We present a proof-of-concept PWP prompt for the critical analysis of experimental chemistry manuscripts.<n>We develop this PWP prompt through iterative application of meta-prompting techniques and meta-reasoning aimed at systematically codifying expert review.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-06T09:06:18Z)
• Utility-Focused LLM Annotation for Retrieval and Retrieval-Augmented Generation [96.18720164390699]
  This paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) for annotating document utility in training retrieval and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems.<n>Our results show that LLM-generated annotations enhance out-of-domain retrieval performance and improve RAG outcomes compared to models trained solely on human annotations or downstream QA metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T16:05:52Z)
• From Prompts to Templates: A Systematic Prompt Template Analysis for Real-world LLMapps [20.549178260624043]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized human-AI interaction by enabling intuitive task execution through natural language prompts. Small variations in structure or wording can result in substantial differences in output. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of prompt templates in practical LLMapps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T18:20:06Z)
• Latent Factor Models Meets Instructions: Goal-conditioned Latent Factor Discovery without Task Supervision [50.45597801390757]
  Instruct-LF is a goal-oriented latent factor discovery system. It integrates instruction-following ability with statistical models to handle noisy datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:03:08Z)
• A Framework for Using LLMs for Repository Mining Studies in Empirical Software Engineering [12.504438766461027]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed Software Engineering (SE) by providing innovative methods for analyzing software repositories.<n>Our research packages a framework, coined Prompt Refinement and Insights for Mining Empirical Software repositories (PRIMES)<n>Our findings indicate that standardizing prompt engineering and using PRIMES can enhance the reliability and accuracy of studies utilizing LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T06:08:57Z)
• Are LLMs Better than Reported? Detecting Label Errors and Mitigating Their Effect on Model Performance [28.524573212179124]
  Large language models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to enhance the annotation process.<n>We compare expert, crowd-sourced, and LLM-based annotations in terms of the agreement, label quality, and efficiency.<n>Our findings reveal a substantial number of label errors, which, when corrected, a significant upward shift in reported model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T16:27:03Z)
• MQM-APE: Toward High-Quality Error Annotation Predictors with Automatic Post-Editing in LLM Translation Evaluators [53.91199933655421]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown significant potential as judges for Machine Translation (MT) quality assessment.<n>We introduce a universal and training-free framework, $textbfMQM-APE, based on the idea of filtering out non-impactful errors.<n>Experiments show that our approach consistently improves both the reliability and quality of error spans against GEMBA-MQM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-22T06:43:40Z)
• The Ultimate Guide to Fine-Tuning LLMs from Basics to Breakthroughs: An Exhaustive Review of Technologies, Research, Best Practices, Applied Research Challenges and Opportunities [0.35998666903987897]
  This report examines the fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs) It outlines the historical evolution of LLMs from traditional Natural Language Processing (NLP) models to their pivotal role in AI. The report introduces a structured seven-stage pipeline for fine-tuning LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T14:48:02Z)
• Leveraging the Power of LLMs: A Fine-Tuning Approach for High-Quality Aspect-Based Summarization [25.052557735932535]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the potential to revolutionize diverse tasks within natural language processing. This paper explores the potential of fine-tuning LLMs for the aspect-based summarization task. We evaluate the impact of fine-tuning open-source foundation LLMs, including Llama2, Mistral, Gemma and Aya, on a publicly available domain-specific aspect based summary dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T16:00:21Z)
• Exploring Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMs [60.32717556756674]
  This paper introduces a systematic evaluation framework to assess Large Language Models in detecting cryptographic misuses. Our in-depth analysis of 11,940 LLM-generated reports highlights that the inherent instabilities in LLMs can lead to over half of the reports being false positives. The optimized approach achieves a remarkable detection rate of nearly 90%, surpassing traditional methods and uncovering previously unknown misuses in established benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T15:31:26Z)
• Systematic Task Exploration with LLMs: A Study in Citation Text Generation [63.50597360948099]
  Large language models (LLMs) bring unprecedented flexibility in defining and executing complex, creative natural language generation (NLG) tasks. We propose a three-component research framework that consists of systematic input manipulation, reference data, and output measurement. We use this framework to explore citation text generation -- a popular scholarly NLP task that lacks consensus on the task definition and evaluation metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T16:41:08Z)
• RePrompt: Planning by Automatic Prompt Engineering for Large Language Models Agents [27.807695570974644]
  We propose a novel method, textscRePrompt, which does agradient descent"-like approach to optimize the step-by-step instructions in the prompts given to LLM agents. By leveraging intermediate feedback, textscRePrompt can optimize the prompt without the need for a final solution checker.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T01:23:11Z)
• DALD: Improving Logits-based Detector without Logits from Black-box LLMs [56.234109491884126]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized text generation, producing outputs that closely mimic human writing. We present Distribution-Aligned LLMs Detection (DALD), an innovative framework that redefines the state-of-the-art performance in black-box text detection. DALD is designed to align the surrogate model's distribution with that of unknown target LLMs, ensuring enhanced detection capability and resilience against rapid model iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T19:38:05Z)
• Improve Temporal Awareness of LLMs for Sequential Recommendation [61.723928508200196]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive zero-shot abilities in solving a wide range of general-purpose tasks. LLMs fall short in recognizing and utilizing temporal information, rendering poor performance in tasks that require an understanding of sequential data. We propose three prompting strategies to exploit temporal information within historical interactions for LLM-based sequential recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-05T00:21:26Z)
• An In-depth Evaluation of Large Language Models in Sentence Simplification with Error-based Human Assessment [9.156064716689833]
  This study provides in-depth insights into LLMs' performance while ensuring the reliability of the evaluation.<n>We select both closed-source and open-source LLMs, including GPT-4, Qwen2.5-72B, and Llama-3.2-3B.<n>Results show that LLMs generally generate fewer erroneous simplification outputs compared to the previous state-of-the-art.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T00:19:24Z)
• LLM Inference Unveiled: Survey and Roofline Model Insights [62.92811060490876]
  Large Language Model (LLM) inference is rapidly evolving, presenting a unique blend of opportunities and challenges. Our survey stands out from traditional literature reviews by not only summarizing the current state of research but also by introducing a framework based on roofline model. This framework identifies the bottlenecks when deploying LLMs on hardware devices and provides a clear understanding of practical problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-26T07:33:05Z)
• How Can LLM Guide RL? A Value-Based Approach [68.55316627400683]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) has become the de facto standard practice for sequential decision-making problems by improving future acting policies with feedback. Recent developments in large language models (LLMs) have showcased impressive capabilities in language understanding and generation, yet they fall short in exploration and self-improvement capabilities. We develop an algorithm named LINVIT that incorporates LLM guidance as a regularization factor in value-based RL, leading to significant reductions in the amount of data needed for learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-25T20:07:13Z)
• Large Language Models for Data Annotation and Synthesis: A Survey [49.8318827245266]
  This survey focuses on the utility of Large Language Models for data annotation and synthesis. It includes an in-depth taxonomy of data types that LLMs can annotate, a review of learning strategies for models utilizing LLM-generated annotations, and a detailed discussion of the primary challenges and limitations associated with using LLMs for data annotation and synthesis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T00:44:04Z)
• ALLURE: Auditing and Improving LLM-based Evaluation of Text using Iterative In-Context-Learning [7.457517083017178]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used for evaluation of text generated by humans and AI alike. Despite their utility, LLMs exhibit distinct failure modes, necessitating a thorough audit and improvement of their text evaluation capabilities. Here we introduce ALLURE, a systematic approach to Auditing Large Language Models Understanding and Reasoning Errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-24T17:15:58Z)
• On Learning to Summarize with Large Language Models as References [101.79795027550959]
  Large language models (LLMs) are favored by human annotators over the original reference summaries in commonly used summarization datasets. We study an LLM-as-reference learning setting for smaller text summarization models to investigate whether their performance can be substantially improved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:56:04Z)

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.