Taking a SEAT: Predicting Value Interpretations from Sentiment, Emotion, Argument, and Topic Annotations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01976v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2025 12:51:33 GMT
• Title: Taking a SEAT: Predicting Value Interpretations from Sentiment, Emotion, Argument, and Topic Annotations
• Authors: Adina Nicola Dobrinoiu, Ana Cristiana Marcu, Amir Homayounirad, Luciano Cavalcante Siebert, Enrico Liscio,
• Abstract summary: We investigate whether a language model can predict individual value interpretations by leveraging multi-dimensional subjective annotations as a proxy for their interpretive lens.<n>That is, we evaluate whether providing examples of how an individual annotates Sentiment, Emotion, Argument, and Topics (SEAT dimensions) helps a language model in predicting their value interpretations.<n>Our experiment across different zero- and few-shot settings demonstrates that providing all SEAT dimensions simultaneously yields superior performance compared to individual dimensions and a baseline where no information about the individual is provided.
• Score: 2.5617827156681625
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Our interpretation of value concepts is shaped by our sociocultural background and lived experiences, and is thus subjective. Recognizing individual value interpretations is important for developing AI systems that can align with diverse human perspectives and avoid bias toward majority viewpoints. To this end, we investigate whether a language model can predict individual value interpretations by leveraging multi-dimensional subjective annotations as a proxy for their interpretive lens. That is, we evaluate whether providing examples of how an individual annotates Sentiment, Emotion, Argument, and Topics (SEAT dimensions) helps a language model in predicting their value interpretations. Our experiment across different zero- and few-shot settings demonstrates that providing all SEAT dimensions simultaneously yields superior performance compared to individual dimensions and a baseline where no information about the individual is provided. Furthermore, individual variations across annotators highlight the importance of accounting for the incorporation of individual subjective annotators. To the best of our knowledge, this controlled setting, although small in size, is the first attempt to go beyond demographics and investigate the impact of annotation behavior on value prediction, providing a solid foundation for future large-scale validation.

Related papers

• Revisiting Salient Object Detection from an Observer-Centric Perspective [48.99721284788945]
  We propose Observer-Centric Salient Object Detection (OC-SOD), where salient regions are predicted by considering not only the visual cues but also the observer-specific factors such as their preferences or intents.<n>As a result, this formulation captures the intrinsic ambiguity and diversity of human perception, enabling personalized and context-aware saliency prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T03:53:01Z)
• Value Profiles for Encoding Human Variation [12.302443348395117]
  Value profiles are descriptions of underlying values compressed from in-context demonstrations.<n>Value profiles offer advantages in terms of scrutability, interpretability, and steerability.<n>We show that the decoder predictions change in line with semantic profile differences, are well-calibrated, and can help explain instance-level disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T17:57:49Z)
• Democratizing Reward Design for Personal and Representative Value-Alignment [10.1630183955549]
  We introduce Interactive-Reflective Dialogue Alignment, a method that iteratively engages users in reflecting on and specifying their subjective value definitions. This system learns individual value definitions through language-model-based preference elicitation and constructs personalized reward models. Our findings demonstrate diverse definitions of value-aligned behaviour and show that our system can accurately capture each person's unique understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T16:37:01Z)
• When Does Perceptual Alignment Benefit Vision Representations? [76.32336818860965]
  We investigate how aligning vision model representations to human perceptual judgments impacts their usability. We find that aligning models to perceptual judgments yields representations that improve upon the original backbones across many downstream tasks. Our results suggest that injecting an inductive bias about human perceptual knowledge into vision models can contribute to better representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:59:58Z)
• Can Language Models Reason about Individualistic Human Values and Preferences? [44.249817353449146]
  We study language models (LMs) on the challenge of individualistic value reasoning.<n>We find critical limitations in frontier LMs, which achieve only 55 % to 65% accuracy in predicting individualistic values.<n>We also identify a partiality of LMs in reasoning about global individualistic values, as measured by our proposed Value Inequity Index (sigmaInequity)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T19:03:41Z)
• POV Learning: Individual Alignment of Multimodal Models using Human Perception [1.4796543791607086]
  We argue that alignment on an individual level can boost the subjective predictive performance for the individual user interacting with the system.<n>We test this, by integrating perception information into machine learning systems and measuring their predictive performance.<n>Our findings suggest that exploiting individual perception signals for the machine learning of subjective human assessments provides a valuable cue for individual alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T16:07:29Z)
• Understanding Before Recommendation: Semantic Aspect-Aware Review Exploitation via Large Language Models [53.337728969143086]
  Recommendation systems harness user-item interactions like clicks and reviews to learn their representations. Previous studies improve recommendation accuracy and interpretability by modeling user preferences across various aspects and intents. We introduce a chain-based prompting approach to uncover semantic aspect-aware interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T15:44:09Z)
• Value Kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with Pluralistic Human Values, Rights, and Duties [68.66719970507273]
  Value pluralism is the view that multiple correct values may be held in tension with one another. As statistical learners, AI systems fit to averages by default, washing out potentially irreducible value conflicts. We introduce ValuePrism, a large-scale dataset of 218k values, rights, and duties connected to 31k human-written situations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T01:24:59Z)
• Natural Language Decompositions of Implicit Content Enable Better Text Representations [52.992875653864076]
  We introduce a method for the analysis of text that takes implicitly communicated content explicitly into account.<n>We use a large language model to produce sets of propositions that are inferentially related to the text that has been observed.<n>Our results suggest that modeling the meanings behind observed language, rather than the literal text alone, is a valuable direction for NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T23:45:20Z)
• Weakly-Supervised Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis via Joint Aspect-Sentiment Topic Embedding [71.2260967797055]
  We propose a weakly-supervised approach for aspect-based sentiment analysis. We learn sentiment, aspect> joint topic embeddings in the word embedding space. We then use neural models to generalize the word-level discriminative information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-13T21:33:24Z)

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.