When AI Rewrites, Classifiers Relax: Uncertainty-Aware Sentiment Analysis on Sarcastic and AI-Paraphrased Social Text
Organizations: Manipal University Jaipur
Abstract
Sentiment classifiers are increasingly applied to social media content that is either sarcastic or AI-generated --- two distributional regimes where standard evaluations offer little guidance. We present a three-part empirical study of sentiment classifier behaviour under these conditions. First, we find that confidence scores on sarcastic text are significantly lower than on non-sarcastic text (Mann--Whitney ), confirming that classifiers sense their own uncertainty on ironic content even without explicit uncertainty modelling. Second, and counterintuitively, we show that sentiment classifiers achieve higher accuracy on AI-paraphrased reviews than on the original human-authored text (RoBERTa: pp for Qwen3.5-4B paraphrases, pp for Gemma4-E4B), revealing a cross-domain stylistic alignment effect: AI paraphrases remove distributional noise that confounds Twitter-trained classifiers, producing cleaner, more prototypical sentiment text. Third, we demonstrate that a lightweight abstention wrapper --- flagging the of inputs with confidence below --- improves accuracy from 82.2% to 88.9% ( pp) on the retained set. We further compare Semantic Entropy and MC-Dropout-style disagreement as uncertainty signals and find near-identical AUROC ( vs.\ ) on sarcastic text, suggesting that for short social media inputs, both methods are interchangeable. Our results motivate a shift from confident single-label prediction to uncertainty-aware abstention in high-stakes sentiment applications such as mental health flagging and content moderation.
Figures & tables
| Subset | Mean conf. | Std |
|---|---|---|
| Sarcastic ( ) | 0.741 | 0.166 |
| Non-sarcastic ( ) | 0.770 | 0.169 |
| Mann–Whitney | ||
| Classifier | Para. model | Human acc. | AI acc. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VADER | Qwen3.5-4B | 70.1% | 73.4% | pp |
| VADER | Gemma4-E4B | 70.1% | 68.4% | pp |
| RoBERTa | Qwen3.5-4B | 82.2% | 88.0% | pp |
| RoBERTa | Gemma4-E4B | 82.2% | 86.0% | pp |
| Content type | ECE |
|---|---|
| Clear-polarity text (Yelp human) | 0.056 |
| AI paraphrases (Qwen3.5-4B) | 0.045 |
| AI paraphrases (Gemma4-E4B) | 0.029 |
| Setting | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Full set ( ) | 82.2% |
| After abstaining on flagged ( ) | 88.9% |
| Flagged examples only ( ) | 41.3% |
| Flagged fraction | 14.0% |
| Accuracy gain | pp |
| Method | AUROC (error prediction) |
|---|---|
| Semantic Entropy | 0.650 |
| MC-Dropout disagreement | 0.646 |