Framing Migration News with LLMs: Structured CoT as a Support for Human Interpretation
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.03761v1
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2026 15:15:39 GMT
- Title: Framing Migration News with LLMs: Structured CoT as a Support for Human Interpretation
- Abstract summary: We introduce a Structured Chain-of-Thought (SCoT) prompting approach using Llama3-8B.<n>SCoT allows users to audit model outputs and examine alternative interpretations in a task that is inherently subjective.<n>We conduct a human-centered evaluation in which annotators assess the coherence and influence of "the model's reasoning"
- Score: 7.86841540422233
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Frame analysis of migration news is a socially consequential task: media scholars and researchers who study how migration is narrated need tools that are not only accurate, but transparent, auditable, and accessible within the resource constraints typical of academic research groups. Existing LLM-based approaches rely on proprietary APIs and large models that raise concerns about data privacy, reproducibility and equitable access among media researchers. This work studies how a locally deployable open-source LLM can support interpretable frame analysis as an assistive tool. We introduce a Structured Chain-of-Thought (SCoT) prompting approach using Llama3-8B, enabling step-by-step justifications grounded in predefined framing categories. This structured design allows users to audit model outputs and examine alternative interpretations in a task that is inherently subjective. We evaluate our approach on a dataset of migration-related news and show that SCoT improves classification performance over zero-shot and few-shot baselines while remaining feasible on a single GPU. Then, we conduct a human-centered evaluation in which annotators assess the coherence and influence of "the model's reasoning". Results indicate that SCoT explanations are generally perceived as logical (mean score 4.1/5, though with notable variation across texts) and can prompt reflection on initial interpretations, even when disagreement persists. Our findings highlight both the potential and risks of LLM-assisted frame analysis. While structured reasoning can increase the traceability of model outputs and support critical interpretation, it can also influence human judgment in subtle ways. By enabling local deployment and emphasizing human-in-the-loop interaction, this work contributes to discussions on responsible and accessible computational tools for the study of socially impactful media narratives.
Related papers
- Agentic Interpretation: Lattice-Structured Evidence for LLM-Based Program Analysis [2.1833756646187763]
We propose agentic interpretation, a framework that brings the discipline of lattice-based static analysis to program reasoning.<n>A worklist algorithm governs how claims and their judgments evolve during the analysis.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-12T19:46:24Z) - Exploratory Semantic Reliability Analysis of Wind Turbine Maintenance Logs using Large Language Models [0.0]
This paper addresses the gap in leveraging modern large language models (LLMs) for more complex reasoning tasks.<n>We introduce an exploratory framework that uses LLMs to move beyond classification and perform semantic analysis.<n>The results demonstrate that LLMs can function as powerful "reliability co-pilots," moving beyond labelling to synthesise textual information and actionable, expert-level hypotheses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-26T14:00:20Z) - Implicit Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey [67.53966514728383]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong generalization across a wide range of tasks.<n>Recent studies have shifted attention from explicit chain-of-thought prompting toward implicit reasoning.<n>This survey introduces a taxonomy centered on execution paradigms, shifting the focus from representational forms to computational strategies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-02T14:16:02Z) - Explain Before You Answer: A Survey on Compositional Visual Reasoning [74.27548620675748]
Compositional visual reasoning has emerged as a key research frontier in multimodal AI.<n>This survey systematically reviews 260+ papers from top venues (CVPR, ICCV, NeurIPS, ICML, ACL, etc.)<n>We then catalog 60+ benchmarks and corresponding metrics that probe compositional visual reasoning along dimensions such as grounding accuracy, chain-of-thought faithfulness, and high-resolution perception.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-24T11:01:51Z) - Mapping the Minds of LLMs: A Graph-Based Analysis of Reasoning LLM [11.181783720439563]
Large Language Models (LLMs) display sophisticated reasoning abilities via extended Chain-of-Thought (CoT) generation.<n>RLMs often demonstrate counterintuitive and unstable behaviors, such as performance degradation under few-shot prompting.<n>We introduce a unified graph-based analytical framework for better modeling the reasoning processes of RLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-20T03:54:57Z) - How do Large Language Models Understand Relevance? A Mechanistic Interpretability Perspective [64.00022624183781]
Large language models (LLMs) can assess relevance and support information retrieval (IR) tasks.<n>We investigate how different LLM modules contribute to relevance judgment through the lens of mechanistic interpretability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-10T16:14:55Z) - Potential and Perils of Large Language Models as Judges of Unstructured Textual Data [0.631976908971572]
This research investigates the effectiveness of LLM-as-judge models to evaluate the thematic alignment of summaries generated by other LLMs.<n>Our findings reveal that while LLM-as-judge offer a scalable solution comparable to human raters, humans may still excel at detecting subtle, context-specific nuances.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-14T14:49:14Z) - Categorical Syllogisms Revisited: A Review of the Logical Reasoning Abilities of LLMs for Analyzing Categorical Syllogism [62.571419297164645]
This paper provides a systematic overview of prior works on the logical reasoning ability of large language models for analyzing categorical syllogisms.<n>We first investigate all the possible variations for the categorical syllogisms from a purely logical perspective.<n>We then examine the underlying configurations (i.e., mood and figure) tested by the existing datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-26T21:17:20Z) - Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs)
We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing.
We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z) - Bring Your Own Data! Self-Supervised Evaluation for Large Language
Models [52.15056231665816]
We propose a framework for self-supervised evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs)
We demonstrate self-supervised evaluation strategies for measuring closed-book knowledge, toxicity, and long-range context dependence.
We find strong correlations between self-supervised and human-supervised evaluations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-23T17:59:09Z)
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.