MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415427950 · doi:10.3233/faia251357

Enhancing Few Shot Named Entity Recognition via Label Semantic Description and Diversity Text

2025· book-chapter· W4415427950 on OpenAlexaff
Fang Du

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntity linkingNamed-entity recognitionSemantic similarityContext (archaeology)Representation (politics)Semantics (computer science)Semantic role labelingGenerative grammar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable few-shot learning capabilities on Named Entity Recognition (NER) tasks, particularly through prompt-based approaches that avoid additional fine-tuning. However, despite the powerful generative and reasoning abilities of LLMs, two critical challenges remain: (1) semantic discrepancy of the same label across different datasets, which leads to recognition errors when using general labels to guide model outputs, and (2) contextual homogeneity in in-context examples, which limits the model’s ability to distinguish fine-grained entity types during inference. To address these challenges, we propose LSDNER, a dual-faceted prompt construction strategy that integrates structured label semantic descriptions and promotes context diversity. Specifically, to tackle label semantic inconsistency, we introduce a structured framework that organizes label semantic descriptions into definitions, attributes, relational features, and behavioral characteristics. This representation enables LLMs to better understand the dataset-specific semantic meanings of entity labels. To address contextual monotony, we devise a diversity-driven sampling strategy for selecting in-context demonstrations, thereby expanding semantic coverage and promoting reasoning capabilities. Experiments on three general and four domain-specific NER datasets demonstrate that our approach surpasses prompt-based methods and achieves competitive results with supervised baselines. Our code is available at: https://github.com/hui68633/LSDNER.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207