MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402683397 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.sighan-1.13

ZZU-NLP at SIGHAN-2024 dimABSA Task: Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis with Coarse-to-Fine In-context Learning

2024· article· en· W4402683397 on OpenAlexaff
Senbin Zhu, Hanjie Zhao, Wxr Wxr, Yuxiang Jia, Hongying Zan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)Natural language processingContext (archaeology)Sentiment analysisEngineeringHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The DimABSA task requires fine-grained sentiment intensity prediction for restaurant reviews, including scores for Valence and Arousal dimensions for each Aspect Term.In this study, we propose a Coarse-to-Fine In-context Learning(CFICL) method based on the Baichuan2-7B model for the DimABSA task in the SIGHAN 2024 workshop.Our method improves prediction accuracy through a two-stage optimization process.In the first stage, we use fixed in-context examples and prompt templates to enhance the model's sentiment recognition capability and provide initial predictions for the test data.In the second stage, we encode the Opinion field using BERT and select the most similar training data as new in-context examples based on similarity.These examples include the Opinion field and its scores, as well as related opinion words and their average scores.By filtering for sentiment polarity, we ensure that the examples are consistent with the test data.Our method significantly improves prediction accuracy and consistency by effectively utilizing training data and optimizing in-context examples, as validated by experimental results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.020

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207