Aspect-Based Sentiment Intensity Analysis (ABSIA) has garnered increasing attention, though research largely focuses on domain-specific, sentence-level settings. In contrast, document-level ABSIA--particularly in addressing complex tasks like extracting Aspect-Category-Opinion-Sentiment-Intensity (ACOSI) tuples--remains underexplored. In this work, we introduce DanceHA, a multi-agent framework designed for open-ended, document-level ABSIA with informal writing styles. DanceHA has two main components: Dance, which employs a divide-and-conquer strategy to decompose the long-context ABSIA task into smaller, manageable sub-tasks for collaboration among specialized agents; and HA, Human-AI collaboration for annotation. We release Inf-ABSIA, a multi-domain document-level ABSIA dataset featuring fine-grained and high-accuracy labels from DanceHA. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our agentic framework and show that the multi-agent knowledge in DanceHA can be effectively transferred into student models. Our results highlight the importance of the overlooked informal styles in ABSIA, as they often intensify opinions tied to specific aspects.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of DanceHA , consisting of two key components: (1) Dance ( D ivide- an d- C onquer T e amwork) for open-ended document-level ABSIA and (2) HA ( H uman- A I collaboration) for label annotation. Figure 2 illustrates Dance with an example.
Dataset
# D
Level
Topic
Lang
ACOS
Intensity
Informal
Size
Avg # w
Avg # Tuple
# Tuple
SemEval2016-SB1 ( Pontiki et al. 2016 )
2
Sentence
ABSA
E
Y
N
N
5,984
13
1.18
7,061
ACOS-Rest&Lap ( Cai et al. 2021 )
2
Sentence
ABSA
E
Y
N
N
6,362
16
1.48
9,415
ABSIA ( Mamta and Ekbal 2023 )
1
Sentence
ABSIA
E
N
Y
N
4,650
17
1.00
4,650
SIGHAN2024 ( Lee et al. 2024 )
1
Sentence
ABSIA
C
Y
Y
N
8,150
15
1.50
12,225
SemEval2016-SB2 ( Pontiki et al. 2016 )
2
Document
ABSA
E
N
N
N
900
60
4.96
4,464
DOTSA ( Luo et al. 2022 )
6
Document
ABSA
E
N
N
N
1,194
23
1.26
1,504
Table 1: Statistics comparison of Inf-ABSIA with existing ABSA/ABSIA datasets. Inf-ABSIA has larger sample size (2,714 vs. 1,194), longer context (avg. words 90 vs. 60), and more fine-grained labels (avg. tuples 8.48 vs. 4.96). # D indicates the number of domains. # w denotes the number of words. Lang denotes the language, where E stands for English and C for Chinese.
Figure 2: An example of Dance for document-level ABSIA.
Domain
Method
Model
F1 (%)
Acc (%)
MAE
Rest
zs-CoT
GPT-4o
22.95 ± 1.14
12.97 ± 0.73
0.467 ± 0.053
fs-CoT
GPT-4o
35.04 ± 2.43
21.27 ± 1.80
0.428 ± 0.023
Dance
GPT-3.5-turbo
4.89 ± 0.31
2.50 ± 0.16
0.791 ± 0.073
Dance
GPT-4o-mini
19.90 ± 0.38
11.05 ± 0.23
0.418 ± 0.007
Dance
GPT-4o
47.80 ± 1.65
31.42 ± 1.41
0.210 ± 0.019
Dance
DeepSeek-V3
37.93 ± 1.75
23.42 ± 1.33
0.274 ± 0.016
Table 2: Performance comparison of Dance, MA, zero-shot (zs) and 5-shot (fs) CoT with various base models on Inf-ABSIA. F1 and Acc represent the evaluation metrics for the ACOS tuple extraction, MAE for SIS. ± indicates std score. We use boldface to indicate the best performance within each method.
Expert Agents
Divider ( FD )
Category ( FC )
Opinion ( FO )
Sentiment Polarity & Intensity ( FS )
Sub-tasks
Thought Group
Aspect
All
All
All
Polarity
SIS
All
Rest
GPT-3.5-turbo
17.71 ± 0.16
8.54 ± 1.22
2.40 ± 0.26
75.33 ± 1.88
36.87 ± 3.42
96.69 ± 0.80
40.06 ± 2.76
38.73 ± 2.68
GPT-4o-mini
20.32 ± 0.19
29.66 ± 1.48
10.29 ± 0.28
78.37 ± 1.29
46.77 ± 2.86
95.20 ± 1.98
59.52 ± 0.48
56.66 ± 1.22
GPT-4o
54.11 ± 1.49
54.53 ± 1.73
36.01 ± 1.21
82.58 ± 0.69
68.39 ± 1.07
95.96 ± 0.49
73.43 ± 1.25
70.47 ± 1.54
DeepSeek-V3
51.81 ± 1.09
46.47 ± 0.82
28.34 ± 0.35
81.79 ± 0.71
61.06 ± 0.93
95.14 ± 1.64
70.52 ± 2.18
67.09 ± 2.43
Qwen3-4B
24.40 ± 0.17
26.90 ± 2.65
9.53 ± 0.76
72.77 ± 0.33
35.43 ± 2.34
96.59 ± 1.97
39.01 ± 2.88
37.69 ± 3.10
Table 3: Evaluation of Expert Agents in Dance and their sub-tasks. The evaluation metric is accuracy (%). We use boldface to indicate the best performance and underline to indicate the second-best.
Figure 3: SIS scores for ACOSI tuples with informal and formal styles among different baselines. Error bars indicate standard deviation score. Results demonstrate the influence of informal styles on sentiment intensity and the capability of advanced models to interpret informal expressions.
Method
F1(%)
Acc(%)
MAE
Rest
Dance
35.38
21.50
0.364
w/o D&C
27.19 (8.19↓)
15.73 (5.76↓)
0.473 (0.109↑)
w/o Teamwork
32.48 (2.90↓)
19.40 (2.10↓)
0.456 (0.093↑)
Hotel
Dance
32.76
19.61
0.327
w/o D&C
22.28 (10.48↓)
12.54 (7.07↓)
0.490 (0.163↑)
w/o Teamwork
29.81 (2.95↓)
17.53 (2.08↓)
0.479 (0.151↑)
Table 4: Ablation results for the Dance component. w/o D&C removes the Divide-and-Conquer Strategy; w/o Teamwork uses a single agent for the Conquer phase. Red indicates performance drops.
Method
Model
Mode
F1 (%)
Acc (%)
MAE
Rest
zs-CoT
4B
think
20.22 ± 2.34
11.27 ± 1.44
1.238 ± 0.068
zs-CoT
14B
think
19.06 ± 2.80
10.56 ± 1.73
0.740 ± 0.100
Dance
4B
none
13.68 ± 1.13
7.34 ± 0.65
0.909 ± 0.051
Dance
14B
none
25.87 ± 1.85
14.87 ± 1.23
1.016 ± 0.010
SFT
4B
think
30.82 ± 1.14
18.22 ± 0.80
0.408 ± 0.026
SFT
14B
think
34.52 ± 1.23
20.87 ± 0.91
0.395 ± 0.031
Table 5: Results for distillation with reasoning chains. We use boldface to indicate the best performance and underline to indicate the second-best. Model 4B denotes Qwen3-4B; 14B denotes Qwen3-14B.
Rest
Hotel
Laptop
Avg
Rater
4.62
4.55
4.25
4.47
IAA
0.65
0.61
0.58
0.61
Table 6: Human evaluation results for data quality.
Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) encompasses seven distinct subtasks, each focusing on different extracted elements. Despite the proven success of generative models in unified aspect sentiment analysis, existing approaches often rely on auto-regressive token-by-token generation without grasping the whole information of the aspect and opinion terms, resulting in boundary insensitivity, particularly in context of multi-word aspect and opinion terms. To address these issues, we present DiffuSent, a non-auto-regressive diffusion framework that systematically formulates all ABSA subtasks as boundary denoising diffusion processes, progressively refining boundaries over noisy states. Furthermore, we introduce a contrastive denoising training strategy which effectively address duplicate predictions with subtle variations introduced by diffusion process. Extensive experiments across 28 settings (7 subtasks x 4 datasets) demonstrate that DiffuSent achieves delivers consistent improvements over the strongest generative and span-based systems. DiffuSent exhibits notable gains on multi-word triplets, achieving an average improvement of +2.48 F1, and maintains robust extraction accuracy in sentences containing multiple sentiment triplets. Moreover, the non-auto-regressive decoding enables substantial efficiency benefits, reaching up to 181 times faster inference than auto-regressive generative baselines
Shu Long, Yanglei Gan, Xuchuan Zhou
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · Southwest Petroleum University · Southwest Minzu University
Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) requires high-quality datasets to train reliable models. However, existing annotation tools treat output as flat files, leaving researchers to manually consolidate multi-annotator data, reconstruct relational structures, and compute reliability metrics through custom scripts. This paper introduces ACAT (Aspect-based sentiment analysis Collaborative Annotation Tool), a web-based platform natively supporting four ABSA workflows: (1) Aspect-Category Sentiment Analysis, (2) Clause-Level Segmentation, (3) Aspect-Term Sentiment Analysis with character-level position tracking, and (4) Aspect Sentiment Triplet Extraction with dual span offset preservation. Its core contribution is an automated Extract, Transform, Load (ETL) pipeline that aligns collaborative annotations and computes Inter-Annotator Agreement (IAA) metrics directly at export, yielding training-ready datasets. In a preliminary validation on 1,002 restaurant reviews with two annotators of differing expertise, ACAT achieves a median annotation time of 31.58 seconds and a raw IAA ranging from 0.78 to 0.86 across all tasks.
We introduce AnnoABSA, the first web-based annotation tool to support the full spectrum of Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) tasks. The tool is highly customizable, enabling flexible configuration of sentiment elements and task-specific requirements. Alongside manual annotation, AnnoABSA provides optional Large Language Model (LLM)-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) suggestions that offer context-aware assistance in a human-in-the-loop approach, keeping the human annotator in control. To improve prediction quality over time, the system retrieves the ten most similar examples that are already annotated and adds them as few-shot examples in the prompt, ensuring that suggestions become increasingly accurate as the annotation process progresses. Released as open-source software under the MIT License, AnnoABSA is freely accessible and easily extendable for research and practical applications.
Nils Constantin Hellwig, Jakob Fehle, Udo Kruschwitz +1
Media Informatics Group, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany · Information Science Group, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany