Comparing LLM and Fine-Tuned Model Performance on NVDRS Circumstance Extraction with Varying Prompt Complexity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21845v1
• Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 00:33:52 GMT
• Title: Comparing LLM and Fine-Tuned Model Performance on NVDRS Circumstance Extraction with Varying Prompt Complexity
• Abstract summary: We develop an algorithm that analyzes coding manual structure to predict when detailed prompts with full coding guidelines improve over name-only prompts.<n>We evaluate large language models (LLMs) against fine-tuned RoBERTa on 25 inferentially complex circumstances from the National Violent Death Reporting System.
• Score: 8.474809035213118
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Suicide is a leading cause of death in the United States, and understanding the circumstances that precede it requires extracting structured information from death investigation narratives. Many of these circumstances require semantic inference beyond simple keyword matching. We develop a ``Complexity Score'' algorithm that analyzes coding manual structure to predict when detailed prompts with full coding guidelines improve over name-only prompts. We then construct a hybrid approach that selects prompt strategy per circumstance. We evaluate large language models (LLMs) against fine-tuned RoBERTa on 25 inferentially complex circumstances from the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS). We found that LLMs substantially outperform on low-prevalence circumstances where training data is insufficient. We further demonstrate that our framework generalizes across frontier LLMs, with GPT-5.2, Gemini 2.5 Pro and Llama-3 70B showing consistent performance patterns. These findings support a hybrid architecture where LLMs handle rare, inferentially complex circumstances while fine-tuned models handle common ones.

Related papers

• SICI: A Semantic-Pragmatic Complexity Index Reveals Regime Shifts in LLM Stance Detection [4.363650510090806]
  We introduce SICI, a seven-dimensional diagnostic measure of the semantic-pragmatic burden imposed by a target--text pair.<n>Across SemEval-2016 and VAST, SICI predicts LLM accuracy better than surface proxies and shows substantial cross-scorer reliability.<n>A 15-method intervention study further shows that prompting, retrieval, and debate often shift models along the attribution--abstention axis rather than removing the high-complexity bottleneck.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-11T10:58:18Z)
• From Early Encoding to Late Suppression: Interpreting LLMs on Character Counting Tasks [49.57538588967748]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit failures on elementary symbolic tasks such as character counting in a word, despite excelling on complex benchmarks.<n>We uncover a consistent phenomenon across modern architectures, including LLaMA, Qwen, and Gemma.<n>We show that symbolic reasoning failures in LLMs are not due to missing representations or insufficient scale, but arise from structured interference within the model's computation graph.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-01T11:40:12Z)
• FORESTLLM: Large Language Models Make Random Forest Great on Few-shot Tabular Learning [20.27406245916013]
  We propose a novel framework that unifies the structural inductive biases of decision forests with the semantic reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>Our method is two-fold. First, we introduce a semantic splitting criterion in which the LLM evaluates candidate partitions based on their coherence over both labeled and unlabeled data, enabling the induction of more robust and generalizable tree structures under few-shot supervision.<n>Second, we propose a one-time in-context inference mechanism for leaf node stabilization, where the LLM distills the decision path and its supporting examples into a concise, deterministic prediction, replacing noisy empirical estimates with semantically informed outputs
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T14:08:51Z)
• Quantifying Laziness, Decoding Suboptimality, and Context Degradation in Large Language Models [0.4511923587827302]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit behavioral artifacts such as laziness, decoded suboptimality, and context degradation.<n>Our results indicate widespread laziness in satisfying complex multi-part instructions.<n>We suggest strategies to reduce laziness and bolster multi-instruction compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-19T03:01:59Z)
• LLM-Symbolic Integration for Robust Temporal Tabular Reasoning [69.27153114778748]
  We introduce TempTabQA-C, a synthetic dataset designed for systematic and controlled evaluations.<n>This structured approach allows Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate and executesql queries, enhancing generalization and mitigating biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T05:14:04Z)
• Incentivizing Reasoning for Advanced Instruction-Following of Large Language Models [31.962209251193272]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) is expected to universally improve capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose RAIF, a systematic method to boost LLMs in dealing with complex instructions via incentivizing reasoning for test-time compute scaling.<n>We address the shallow, non-essential nature of reasoning under complex instructions via sample-wise contrast for superior CoT enforcement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T08:11:44Z)
• HELMET: How to Evaluate Long-Context Language Models Effectively and Thoroughly [34.205934899868346]
  We introduce HELMET, a comprehensive benchmark encompassing seven diverse, application-centric categories.<n>We find that synthetic tasks like NIAH do not reliably predict downstream performance.<n>While most LCLMs achieve perfect NIAH scores, open-source models significantly lag behind closed ones when tasks require full-context reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T17:20:11Z)
• DARG: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models via Adaptive Reasoning Graph [70.79413606968814]
  We introduce Dynamic Evaluation of LLMs via Adaptive Reasoning Graph Evolvement (DARG) to dynamically extend current benchmarks with controlled complexity and diversity. Specifically, we first extract the reasoning graphs of data points in current benchmarks and then perturb the reasoning graphs to generate novel testing data. Such newly generated test samples can have different levels of complexity while maintaining linguistic diversity similar to the original benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T04:27:53Z)
• On the Worst Prompt Performance of Large Language Models [93.13542053835542]
  Performance of large language models (LLMs) is acutely sensitive to the phrasing of prompts. We introduce RobustAlpacaEval, a new benchmark that consists of semantically equivalent case-level queries. Experiments on RobustAlpacaEval with ChatGPT and six open-source LLMs from the Llama, Mistral, and Gemma families uncover substantial variability in model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-08T13:40:38Z)
• Can large language models explore in-context? [87.49311128190143]
  We deploy Large Language Models as agents in simple multi-armed bandit environments. We find that the models do not robustly engage in exploration without substantial interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T17:50:43Z)
• Can Large Language Models Understand Real-World Complex Instructions? [54.86632921036983]
  Large language models (LLMs) can understand human instructions, but struggle with complex instructions. Existing benchmarks are insufficient to assess LLMs' ability to understand complex instructions. We propose CELLO, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs' ability to follow complex instructions systematically.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-17T04:18:39Z)

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.