Reliable Decision Support with LLMs: A Framework for Evaluating Consistency in Binary Text Classification Applications

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.14918v1
• Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 21:12:58 GMT
• Title: Reliable Decision Support with LLMs: A Framework for Evaluating Consistency in Binary Text Classification Applications
• Authors: Fadel M. Megahed, Ying-Ju Chen, L. Allision Jones-Farmer, Younghwa Lee, Jiawei Brooke Wang, Inez M. Zwetsloot,
• Abstract summary: This study introduces a framework for evaluating consistency in large language model (LLM) binary text classification.<n>We determine sample size requirements, develop metrics for invalid responses, and evaluate intra- and inter-rater reliability.
• Score: 0.7124971549479361
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: This study introduces a framework for evaluating consistency in large language model (LLM) binary text classification, addressing the lack of established reliability assessment methods. Adapting psychometric principles, we determine sample size requirements, develop metrics for invalid responses, and evaluate intra- and inter-rater reliability. Our case study examines financial news sentiment classification across 14 LLMs (including claude-3-7-sonnet, gpt-4o, deepseek-r1, gemma3, llama3.2, phi4, and command-r-plus), with five replicates per model on 1,350 articles. Models demonstrated high intra-rater consistency, achieving perfect agreement on 90-98% of examples, with minimal differences between expensive and economical models from the same families. When validated against StockNewsAPI labels, models achieved strong performance (accuracy 0.76-0.88), with smaller models like gemma3:1B, llama3.2:3B, and claude-3-5-haiku outperforming larger counterparts. All models performed at chance when predicting actual market movements, indicating task constraints rather than model limitations. Our framework provides systematic guidance for LLM selection, sample size planning, and reliability assessment, enabling organizations to optimize resources for classification tasks.

Related papers

• LLMEval-3: A Large-Scale Longitudinal Study on Robust and Fair Evaluation of Large Language Models [51.55869466207234]
  Existing evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) on static benchmarks is vulnerable to data contamination and leaderboard overfitting.<n>We introduce LLMEval-3, a framework for dynamic evaluation of LLMs.<n>LLEval-3 is built on a proprietary bank of 220k graduate-level questions, from which it dynamically samples unseen test sets for each evaluation run.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T14:46:30Z)
• Towards Robust LLMs: an Adversarial Robustness Measurement Framework [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to adversarial perturbations, undermining their reliability in high-stakes applications.<n>We adapt the Robustness Measurement and Assessment framework to quantify LLM resilience against adversarial inputs without requiring access to model parameters.<n>Our work provides a systematic methodology to assess LLM robustness, advancing the development of more reliable language models for real-world deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T16:36:19Z)
• SCORE: Systematic COnsistency and Robustness Evaluation for Large Language Models [4.875712300661656]
  We present SCORE ($mathbfS$ystematic $mathbfCO$nsistency and $mathbfR$obustness $mathbfE$valuation), a comprehensive framework for non-adversarial evaluation of Large Language Models.<n>The SCORE framework evaluates models by repeatedly testing them on the same benchmarks in various setups to give a realistic estimate of their accuracy and consistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T19:27:29Z)
• Mix Data or Merge Models? Balancing the Helpfulness, Honesty, and Harmlessness of Large Language Model via Model Merging [36.00016254809852]
  This paper systematically compares the effectiveness of model merging and data mixture methods in constructing 3H-aligned LLMs.<n>We propose a novel textbfReweighting textbfEnhanced task textbfSingular textbfMerging method, textbfRESM, through outlier weighting and sparsity-aware rank selection strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T11:56:58Z)
• Self-Rationalization in the Wild: A Large Scale Out-of-Distribution Evaluation on NLI-related tasks [59.47851630504264]
  Free-text explanations are expressive and easy to understand, but many datasets lack annotated explanation data.<n>We fine-tune T5-Large and OLMo-7B models and assess the impact of fine-tuning data quality, the number of fine-tuning samples, and few-shot selection methods.<n>The models are evaluated on 19 diverse OOD datasets across three tasks: natural language inference (NLI), fact-checking, and hallucination detection in abstractive summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T10:01:32Z)
• A NotSo Simple Way to Beat Simple Bench [0.0]
  This paper presents a novel framework for enhancing reasoning capabilities in large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose a multi-step prompting strategy coupled with global consistency checks to improve model accuracy and robustness.<n>Our results reveal model-specific strengths: Claude excels in maintaining logical consistency, while GPT-4o exhibits exploratory creativity but struggles with ambiguous prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T16:04:31Z)
• Unearthing Skill-Level Insights for Understanding Trade-Offs of Foundation Models [61.467781476005435]
  skill-wise performance is obscured when inspecting aggregate accuracy, under-utilizing the rich signal modern benchmarks contain. We propose an automatic approach to recover the underlying skills relevant for any evaluation instance, by way of inspecting model-generated rationales. Our skill-slices and framework open a new avenue in model evaluation, leveraging skill-specific analyses to unlock a more granular and actionable understanding of model capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T17:51:40Z)
• Data Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models and Text-to-Image Models via Adaptive Sampling [3.7467864495337624]
  SubLIME is a data-efficient evaluation framework for text-to-image models. Our approach ensures statistically aligned model rankings compared to full datasets. We leverage the HEIM leaderboard to cover 25 text-to-image models on 17 different benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T07:38:55Z)
• Large Language Model Confidence Estimation via Black-Box Access [30.490207799344333]
  We explore the problem of estimating confidence for responses of large language models (LLMs) with simply black-box or query access to them.<n>We propose a simple and generalize framework where, we engineer novel features and train a (interpretable) model (viz. logistic regression) on these features to estimate the confidence.<n>We empirically demonstrate that our simple framework is effective in estimating confidence of Flan-ul2,-13b, Mistral-7b and GPT-4 on four benchmark Q&A tasks as well as Pegasus-large and BART-large on two benchmark summarization tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-01T02:08:44Z)
• Discover, Explanation, Improvement: An Automatic Slice Detection Framework for Natural Language Processing [72.14557106085284]
  slice detection models (SDM) automatically identify underperforming groups of datapoints. This paper proposes a benchmark named "Discover, Explain, improve (DEIM)" for classification NLP tasks. Our evaluation shows that Edisa can accurately select error-prone datapoints with informative semantic features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-08T19:00:00Z)
• Sparse MoEs meet Efficient Ensembles [49.313497379189315]
  We study the interplay of two popular classes of such models: ensembles of neural networks and sparse mixture of experts (sparse MoEs) We present Efficient Ensemble of Experts (E$3$), a scalable and simple ensemble of sparse MoEs that takes the best of both classes of models, while using up to 45% fewer FLOPs than a deep ensemble.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-07T11:58:35Z)
• How Faithful is your Synthetic Data? Sample-level Metrics for Evaluating and Auditing Generative Models [95.8037674226622]
  We introduce a 3-dimensional evaluation metric that characterizes the fidelity, diversity and generalization performance of any generative model in a domain-agnostic fashion. Our metric unifies statistical divergence measures with precision-recall analysis, enabling sample- and distribution-level diagnoses of model fidelity and diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-17T18:25:30Z)
• Meta-Learned Confidence for Few-shot Learning [60.6086305523402]
  A popular transductive inference technique for few-shot metric-based approaches, is to update the prototype of each class with the mean of the most confident query examples. We propose to meta-learn the confidence for each query sample, to assign optimal weights to unlabeled queries. We validate our few-shot learning model with meta-learned confidence on four benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T10:22:17Z)

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.