On Sarcasm Detection with OpenAI GPT-Based Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sarcasm is a form of irony that requires readers or listeners to interpret its intended meaning by considering context and social cues. Machine learning classification models have long had difficulty detecting sarcasm due to its social complexity and contradictory nature. This paper explores the applications of the Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) models, including GPT-3, Instruct-GPT, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4, in detecting sarcasm in natural language. It tests fine-tuned and zero-shot models of different sizes and releases. The GPT models were tested on the political and balanced (pol-bal) portion of the popular Self-Annotated Reddit Corpus (SARC 2.0) sarcasm dataset. In the fine-tuning case, the largest fine-tuned GPT-3 model achieves accuracy and F<inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</inf>-score of 0.81, outperforming prior models. In the zero-shot case, one of GPT-4 models yields an accuracy of 0.70 and F<inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</inf>-score of 0.75. Other models score lower. Additionally, a model's performance may improve or deteriorate with each release, highlighting the need to reassess performance after each release.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it