Computational frame analysis revisited: On LLMs for studying news coverage

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17746v1
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 19:52:46 GMT
• Title: Computational frame analysis revisited: On LLMs for studying news coverage
• Authors: Sharaj Kunjar, Alyssa Hasegawa Smith, Tyler R Mckenzie, Rushali Mohbe, Samuel V Scarpino, Brooke Foucault Welles,
• Abstract summary: Generative LLMs like GPT and Claude are increasingly being used as content analytical tools.<n>We systematically evaluate them against their computational predecessors.<n>We conclude by endorsing a methodologically pluralistic approach and put forth a roadmap for computational frame analysis for researchers going forward.
• Score: 1.4528491369411618
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Computational approaches have previously shown various promises and pitfalls when it comes to the reliable identification of media frames. Generative LLMs like GPT and Claude are increasingly being used as content analytical tools, but how effective are they for frame analysis? We address this question by systematically evaluating them against their computational predecessors: bag-of-words models and encoder-only transformers; and traditional manual coding procedures. Our analysis rests on a novel gold standard dataset that we inductively and iteratively developed through the study, investigating six months of news coverage of the US Mpox epidemic of 2022. While we discover some potential applications for generative LLMs, we demonstrate that they were consistently outperformed by manual coders, and in some instances, by smaller language models. Some form of human validation was always necessary to determine appropriate model choice. Additionally, by examining how the suitability of various approaches depended on the nature of different tasks that were part of our frame analytical workflow, we provide insights as to how researchers may leverage the complementarity of these approaches to use them in tandem. We conclude by endorsing a methodologically pluralistic approach and put forth a roadmap for computational frame analysis for researchers going forward.

Related papers

• Disagreement as Data: Reasoning Trace Analytics in Multi-Agent Systems [0.0]
  We propose that reasoning traces generated by large language model (LLM) agents constitute a novel and rich form of process data.<n>We apply cosine similarity to reasoning traces to systematically detect, quantify, and interpret disagreements among agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T23:19:49Z)
• Teaching LLMs to Think Mathematically: A Critical Study of Decision-Making via Optimization [1.246870021158888]
  This paper investigates the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in formulating and solving decision-making problems using mathematical programming.<n>We first conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent literature to assess how well LLMs understand, structure, and solve optimization problems across domains.<n>Our systematic evidence is complemented by targeted experiments designed to evaluate the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs in automatically generating optimization models for problems in computer networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-25T14:52:56Z)
• 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)
• Advancing AI Research Assistants with Expert-Involved Learning [84.30323604785646]
  Large language models (LLMs) and large multimodal models (LMMs) promise to accelerate biomedical discovery, yet their reliability remains unclear.<n>We introduce ARIEL (AI Research Assistant for Expert-in-the-Loop Learning), an open-source evaluation and optimization framework.<n>We find that state-of-the-art models generate fluent but incomplete summaries, whereas LMMs struggle with detailed visual reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T14:21:48Z)
• Flowco: Rethinking Data Analysis in the Age of LLMs [2.1874189959020427]
  Large language models (LLMs) are now capable of generating such code for simple, routine analyses.<n>LLMs promise to democratize data science by enabling those with limited programming expertise to conduct data analyses.<n>Analysts in many real-world settings must often exercise fine-grained control over specific analysis steps.<n>This paper introduces Flowco, a new mixed-initiative system to address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T19:01:27Z)
• AIRepr: An Analyst-Inspector Framework for Evaluating Reproducibility of LLMs in Data Science [8.281093505963158]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate data analysis through executable code generation.<n>We present AIRepr, an Analyst-Inspector framework for automatically evaluating and improving the of LLM-generated data analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-23T01:15:50Z)
• Context is Key: A Benchmark for Forecasting with Essential Textual Information [87.3175915185287]
  "Context is Key" (CiK) is a forecasting benchmark that pairs numerical data with diverse types of carefully crafted textual context.<n>We evaluate a range of approaches, including statistical models, time series foundation models, and LLM-based forecasters.<n>We propose a simple yet effective LLM prompting method that outperforms all other tested methods on our benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T17:56:08Z)
• Paired Completion: Flexible Quantification of Issue-framing at Scale with LLMs [0.41436032949434404]
  We introduce paired completion', a novel approach to detect contrasting frames using minimal examples.<n>We demonstrate that paired completion is a cost-efficient, low-bias alternative to both prompt-based and embedding-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T07:14:15Z)
• 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)
• Evaluating and Explaining Large Language Models for Code Using Syntactic Structures [74.93762031957883]
  This paper introduces ASTxplainer, an explainability method specific to Large Language Models for code. At its core, ASTxplainer provides an automated method for aligning token predictions with AST nodes. We perform an empirical evaluation on 12 popular LLMs for code using a curated dataset of the most popular GitHub projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-07T18:50:57Z)
• Interpretable Multi-dataset Evaluation for Named Entity Recognition [110.64368106131062]
  We present a general methodology for interpretable evaluation for the named entity recognition (NER) task. The proposed evaluation method enables us to interpret the differences in models and datasets, as well as the interplay between them. By making our analysis tool available, we make it easy for future researchers to run similar analyses and drive progress in this area.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-13T10:53:27Z)

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.