Large Language Models as Automatic Annotators and Annotation Adjudicators for Fine-Grained Opinion Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.16800v1
• Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:52:56 GMT
• Title: Large Language Models as Automatic Annotators and Annotation Adjudicators for Fine-Grained Opinion Analysis
• Authors: Gaurav Negi, MA Waskow, Paul Buitelaar,
• Abstract summary: In this work, we use a declarative annotation pipeline to identify fine-grained opinion spans in text.<n>We show that LLMs can serve as automatic annotators and adjudicators, achieving high Inter-Annotator Agreement across individual LLM-based annotators.<n>This reduces the cost and human effort needed to create these fine-grained opinion-annotated datasets.
• Score: 3.186130813218338
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Fine-grained opinion analysis of text provides a detailed understanding of expressed sentiments, including the addressed entity. Although this level of detail is sound, it requires considerable human effort and substantial cost to annotate opinions in datasets for training models, especially across diverse domains and real-world applications. We explore the feasibility of LLMs as automatic annotators for fine-grained opinion analysis, addressing the shortage of domain-specific labelled datasets. In this work, we use a declarative annotation pipeline. This approach reduces the variability of manual prompt engineering when using LLMs to identify fine-grained opinion spans in text. We also present a novel methodology for an LLM to adjudicate multiple labels and produce final annotations. After trialling the pipeline with models of different sizes for the Aspect Sentiment Triplet Extraction (ASTE) and Aspect-Category-Opinion-Sentiment (ACOS) analysis tasks, we show that LLMs can serve as automatic annotators and adjudicators, achieving high Inter-Annotator Agreement across individual LLM-based annotators. This reduces the cost and human effort needed to create these fine-grained opinion-annotated datasets.

Related papers

• Are Multimodal Large Language Models Good Annotators for Image Tagging? [62.01475514488922]
  This paper aims to analyze the gap between MLLM-generated and human annotations.<n>We propose TagLLM, a novel framework for image tagging, which aims to narrow the gap between MLLM-generated and human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T14:53:16Z)
• 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)
• An AI-Powered Research Assistant in the Lab: A Practical Guide for Text Analysis Through Iterative Collaboration with LLMs [0.7255608805275865]
  Here we present a step-by-step tutorial to efficiently develop, test, and apply for analyzing unstructured data using LLMs.<n>We demonstrate how to write prompts to review datasets and generate a taxonomy of life domains, evaluate and refine the taxonomy through prompt and direct modifications, test the taxonomy and assess intercoder agreements, and apply the taxonomy to categorize an entire dataset with high intercoder reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-14T18:32:18Z)
• SCAN: Structured Capability Assessment and Navigation for LLMs [54.54085382131134]
  textbfSCAN (Structured Capability Assessment and Navigation) is a practical framework that enables detailed characterization of Large Language Models.<n>SCAN incorporates four key components:.<n>TaxBuilder, which extracts capability-indicating tags from queries to construct a hierarchical taxonomy;.<n>RealMix, a query synthesis and filtering mechanism that ensures sufficient evaluation data for each capability tag;.<n>A PC$2$-based (Pre-Comparison-derived Criteria) LLM-as-a-Judge approach achieves significantly higher accuracy compared to classic LLM-as-a-Judge method
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-10T16:52:40Z)
• LLMs as Data Annotators: How Close Are We to Human Performance [47.61698665650761]
  Manual annotation of data is labor-intensive, time-consuming, and costly.<n>In-context learning (ICL) in which some examples related to the task are given in the prompt can lead to inefficiencies and suboptimal model performance.<n>This paper presents experiments comparing several LLMs, considering different embedding models, across various datasets for the Named Entity Recognition (NER) task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T11:11:07Z)
• 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)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• Large Language Models as Financial Data Annotators: A Study on Effectiveness and Efficiency [13.561104321425045]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in data annotation tasks on general domain datasets. We investigate the potential of LLMs as efficient data annotators for extracting relations in financial documents. We demonstrate that the current state-of-the-art LLMs can be sufficient alternatives to non-expert crowdworkers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T23:32:52Z)
• 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.<n>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)
• Can Large Language Models Design Accurate Label Functions? [14.32722091664306]
  Programmatic weak supervision methodologies facilitate the expedited labeling of extensive datasets through the use of label functions (LFs) Recent advances in pre-trained language models (PLMs) have exhibited substantial potential across diverse tasks. This research introduces DataSculpt, an interactive framework that harnesses PLMs for the automated generation of LFs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-01T15:14:46Z)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)

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.