LLM-Assisted Annotation
Momentum
17 papers in the last four weeks, up 143% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.
Latest papers 124
Many annotation projects begin before experts have a stable guideline or enough labels to train a task-specific model. We present Goldsmith, an agentic pipeline that turns a small gold set---expert-annotated calibration examples representing the intended task boundaries---into a reusable structured annotation definition. Goldsmith treats this definition as a trainable textual object. Candidate definitions are run on the same gold examples and scored with an executable structured loss, while the output schema, formatting, retrieval, repair, judging, and human review remain in an external harness. A large language model (LLM) editor converts the highest-loss failures into textual-gradient revisions, which are accepted only when the measured loss decreases. In prompt-optimization comparisons, Goldsmith improves over direct rewriting, OPRO, APE, and PromptBreeder under matched evaluation protocols. The resulting definition also improves downstream annotation when combined with retrieval, score-based routing, and human review across typed span, pair-level relation, and fixed-trigger event-argument tasks. These results show that scarce expert supervision can support both task-definition learning and scalable annotation.
Agreement Is Not Validity: Cross-Model LLM Consensus in Diagnosing Student Failure Modes in K-12 Math Tutoring Dialogue
In K-12 mathematics tutoring, student-tutor dialogue provides rich evidence of learners' problem-solving processes and sources of difficulty. Learning analytics research increasingly relies on large language models (LLMs) to extract such information from dialogue for a variety of downstream tasks, including knowledge tracing, behavioral modeling, and diagnosis of student reasoning errors. However, the validity of these model-generated interpretations remains insufficiently understood. In this exploratory study, we examine the validity of LLM classifications of five student failure modes in mathematics tutoring dialogue using an operational diagnostic codebook: uncertainty, misattribution, operator selection, conceptual gap, and procedural slip. Across models, human-LLM agreement was moderate (kappa = .524-.597), while cross-model agreement was substantially higher (kappa = .755-.781; alpha = .769). These findings show that cross-model agreement can create a misleading appearance of correctness, challenging the assumption that consensus among LLMs constitutes evidence of valid learner interpretation. For learning analytics, the implication is clear: scalable labeling is useful only if the inferred constructs are valid, and model consensus cannot substitute for independent evidence of that validity.
Can LLMs Reliably Annotate Bioassay Metadata to Improve Data Readiness?
The emergence of foundation models for molecular property prediction requires a high degree of AI data readiness, including reliable metadata annotation. However, both public repositories and industrial screening databases suffer from missing, inconsistent, or conflated assay annotations. In this work, we quantify the extent of missing annotations in PubChem for the BioAssay Ontology (BAO) assay format and physical detection method fields and investigate whether open-source and proprietary large language models (LLMs) can reliably predict and audit metadata annotations directly from the assay text. In our assessment, we found that the annotation coverage across PubChem's 2 million bioassays is critically sparse, 36% lacking an assay format, 89% a BioAssay type, and >99.9% any BAO-mapped assay format or detection technology term. This motivates the need for automated test-metadata curation. Using evaluation sets derived from PubChem and ChEMBL, we assess the agreement of seven open-source and proprietary LLMs with existing silver labels. Recall is at least 0.96 for biochemical and cell-based assay formats, with a similar pattern for detection technology, although disagreements increase on under-represented classes. Manual inspection shows that many of these disagreements trace back to inconsistencies between silver sources rather than to LLM error. Moreover, in a qualitative study with a senior industrial curator, LLM-generated evidence prompted the expert to revise some of their own labels, showing LLMs can flag potentially mislabeled assays. Across the study, performance differences between proprietary and open-source models were small. Together, these results suggest LLMs can support the large-scale annotation and auditing of assay metadata, though per-class reliability estimates and targeted human review remain necessary before such labels enter downstream ML pipelines.
LLM-Assisted Discovery of Typed Semantic Links for Ontology Network Construction
Constructing typed, justified semantic links between ontologies is essential for enabling interoperability across heterogeneous and interdisciplinary knowledge domains. However, manually curating such links is difficult to scale. To address this challenge, we propose an end-to-end framework for ontology network construction that automates the discovery and generation of both intra-domain and inter-domain relationships. Our approach combines domain-adapted DistilBERT embeddings for dense contextual representation, clustering-based pre-filtering to reduce the candidate search space, and GPT-4o-driven relationship generation via iterative prompt engineering to produce semantically rich, interpretable links. Applied to ReproduceMeON - a network of 33 ontologies spanning machine learning, microscopy, computational science, and experimental workflow - the pipeline reduces approximately 800k raw concept pairs to 95k high-quality candidates. Human expert validation of 429 generated relationships by two independent annotators yields an overall precision of 80.19% (91.49% on high-certainty annotations) and an F1 of 0.890, with substantial inter-annotator agreement. Comparative experiments against five similarity-based baselines, including Sentence-BERT, show a substantial performance gap (best baseline F1 = 0.581), while an ablation study demonstrates that similarity-based methods alone fail to discriminate valid from invalid relationships (AUC approx 0.5) on the filtered candidate set. These findings highlight the necessity of LLM-based reasoning over concept roles and domain semantics for accurate relationship construction.
Paying for Too Many Tokens? Valid and Cost-Efficient Multimodal LLM Annotation with Simple Heuristics
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) enable video annotation at scale, but costs accumulate quickly: processing a typical 60-second short-form video at one frame per second requires millions of tokens. To reduce costs, researchers rely on heuristics such as sampling a subset of frames, compressing videos into image grids, or using only a single modality. However, it remains unclear which heuristics save cost, and whether they preserve the downstream conclusions these annotations enable. To address this gap, we conduct a systematic evaluation of these heuristics using short-form videos, on two computational social science (CSS) tasks: sentiment and topic classification. We evaluate each configuration along three axes the literature typically treats separately: classification accuracy, validity of downstream inference, and per-video token cost. First, we find that accuracy and validity diverge: the highest-accuracy configuration can produce wrong conclusions. Second, modality value is not guaranteed: text alone can yield strong performance, indicating that adding modalities can add cost without adding signal. Finally, we find that cost can be decoupled from video length when annotating short-form videos: a single image grid built via simple shot-transition detection approaches full-video understanding ( within~.05), at of the token cost. Based on these findings, we derive guidelines that can enable cost-aware VLM annotation in CSS.
QuanReview: Offline, Auditable Reconciliation of Human and LLM Span Annotations
Structured span annotations, such as quantities with their units, uncertainty modifiers, and event classes, are expensive to create and hard to keep trustworthy once language models enter the loop. We present QuanReview, an open-source system for auditing and correcting such annotation layers. QuanReview aligns two annotation streams over the same documents at character level, resolves unambiguous cases by an explicit and logged policy, and routes candidate conflicts to a browser-based adjudication interface where reviewers accept either side, build field-level hybrids, or flag items for re-annotation. A campaign manager assigns documents to multiple annotators with configurable redundancy, computes agreement at document and span level, auto-merges unanimous documents, and exports the corrected layer in the original file format, so that it can replace the original annotation files directly. Applied to a 4,457-record humanitarian benchmark and an LLM extraction stream, the system fully auto-merged 8% of documents, applied automatic policy decisions to a further 1,513 records, and concentrated human attention on 3,131 candidate conflicts, a mean of 5.4 per reviewed document.
EduBehaviors: Assertion-based Schemas for Auditable Coding of Educational Dialogues
Large language models have allowed the rapid deployment of pedagogical annotations corresponding to constructs of interest, allowing a natural language interface for generating classifications on a conversational dataset. However due to the opaque nature of LLM reasoning, we have no verifiable, mechanistic insight into why a model chose a label for an utterance. We introduce the EduBehaviors framework, an interpretable, scalable approach to annotating educational data that uses LLMs to measure repeated observable behaviors relevant to many constructs of interest and then learns a classifier for the construct based on these observable behaviors. We evaluate the framework on the TalkMoves dataset, predicting the Teacher TalkMoves labels. Our best configuration results in a macro-F1 of 0.673 and 0.688 Cohen's kappa, proving competitive with direct prompting approaches. In addition, we release EduBehaviors Toolkit, two tools allowing researchers to operationalize the EduBehaviors framework in their own data.
Experts Rise Where LLMs Disagree: Using Cross-Model Disagreement to Target Expert Effort in LLM Codebook Revision for Large-Scale Annotation
Large-scale text annotation brings expert insight to millions of documents, often through a codebook that AI annotators follow. Developing a robust codebook, however, takes months. Large language models (LLMs) could speed this process by applying an early codebook to the data, surfacing cases with strong LLM disagreement, and eliciting expert feedback to address them. We examined three ways experts can provide feedback for LLM codebook revision: (i) editing LLM-generated revisions driven by cross-LLM disagreement (Codebook Verifying), (ii) answering questions about LLM disagreements (Question Answering), and (iii) labeling disagreement cases with rationales (Rationale Labeling). Experiments on thousands of tutoring-session transcripts show that Rationale Labeling yielded the highest LLM-labeling accuracy (64.9%) against expert labels, outperforming the expert-revised codebook (57.8%). The best Question Answering setting also outperformed it (60.5%). Our work shows that LLMs can be used to strategically target expert attention, shortening months of codebook revision to days without sacrificing labeling performance.
onPanda: Efficient Annotation of On-Policy Alignment Data for LLMs and Agents via Token-Level Correction
We present onPanda, an interactive tool for efficiently annotating LLM alignment data and agent trajectories. onPanda adopts token-level correction as its core interaction: while reading a model response, the annotator locates the first inappropriate token and either picks a substitute from the model's candidate tokens or types the correct text via free-form editing. The system then truncates everything after that position and continues generation from the corrected prefix, repeating this locate-correct-continue loop until a satisfactory response is obtained. This mechanism lets annotators precisely steer model outputs at low cost: a small controlled study suggests that onPanda reduces median annotation time by 52% over manual post-editing. Since the vast majority of tokens in the final response are generated by the model itself, the resulting data largely preserves the model's sampling distribution and is well suited for constructing on-policy SFT and preference data. Furthermore, the token-level corrections recorded during annotation provide fine-grained supervision with precise positions and naturally paired positive--negative samples. onPanda also connects to external tools and harnesses, enabling interactive trajectory annotation in realistic environments. In addition, we release Panda-CVL, a dataset annotated with onPanda, together with a benchmark for token-level correction.
Evaluating Decision Models for Text Annotation in Computational Social Science
Computational social science increasingly relies on large language models for text annotation, and the validity of published findings now rests on the labels generated by such models. Decision models, a new model class built for categorical question answering, answer typed questions with a choice, a probability distribution over the label set, and a confidence score rather than free text, at a small fraction of frontier inference prices. Whether their answers are accurate, and whether that stated confidence can be trusted on social science constructs, are unknown. Here, we mirror the evaluation of Ziems et al. (2024) on 18 computational social science classification tasks (7,977 items), comparing the first commercial decision model and two open-weight counterparts against 19 frontier and open-weight language models under the same zero-shot protocol, and extending the decision-model comparison to eleven open-weight systems released in the week after it. The decision model trails the per-task best LLM on 14 of 15 evaluation tasks, with a median deficit of 11.6 macro-F1 points, at a median 44 times lower measured cost. Its confidence is better calibrated than the verbalized confidence of 16 of the 19 LLMs, yet three frontier models show lower median calibration error (0.157 against 0.066). While items above 0.9 confidence are typically labeled accurately (median accuracy 0.815), on one task, empathy in peer-support dialogues, the model reports high confidence while performing near chance. Nonetheless, our results suggest that decision models are useful as a first step in the annotation pipeline: routing low-confidence items to an LLM matches or exceeds the LLM alone at a quarter to half of its cost.
QLoRA Fine-Tuning of Ministral LLM for Sequence-to-Function Protein Annotation
Functional annotation of newly sequenced proteins remains a bottleneck in molecular biology: the number of sequences in public repositories grows far faster than the capacity for manual curation. Most computational approaches consider annotation as multi-label classification over a fixed ontology, which constrains predictions to a predefined label set. In this work we study the the protein annotation as a sequence-to-text generation problem. We fine-tune the 3B-parameter Ministral 3 base model with QLoRA (4-bit NF4 quantization with low-rank adapters) on sequence annotation pairs. We assess predictions with an LLM-as-expert protocol: a GPT model prompted as a senior molecular-biology curator scores organism identification as binary and function annotation quality. We conclude that QLoRA-fine-tuned compact LLMs can generate curator-style annotations with genuine biological value for a substantial subset of proteins. We also discuss future directions in data quality, model scaling, and evidence grounding that are needed to make the approach sufficiently reliable for practical use.
Beyond Relevance: Structured Semantic Supervision for Product Search with LLM-Augmented Annotations
E-commerce search requires distinguishing products that are merely related to a query from those that directly satisfy the user's shopping intent. We augment query-product pairs with structured LLM-generated query and product attributes and human-validated relevance, explanations, and centrality judgments, and evaluate these signals using a simple dual-encoder retriever and MLP re-ranker. On an augmented subset of ESCI, a human-feature oracle reaches nDCG@10, while a human-free trained configuration reaches . Synthetic approximations of the human signals reach overall but provide substantial gains for difficult, low-performing queries. Ablations show that most of the oracle improvement comes from post-edited explanations and annotator comments rather than the scalar centrality feature, suggesting that LLMs are most useful for exposing and approximating structured semantic supervision rather than replacing human judgment directly.
Reproducibility is not construct validity: LLM measurement of institutionally situated communication
High annotation reproducibility does not necessarily imply that an LLM-inferred measure captures the construct it is intended to measure. We test this distinction using a dataset from the European Commission's AI Act consultation, linking structured survey responses to free-text consultation submissions from the same stakeholders. LLM annotations of consultation submissions are highly reproducible (intraclass correlations > 0.99), yet show limited convergence with survey-reported measures of the nominal construct they were intended to approximate. Divergence between survey-and LLM-inferred text-based measures varies systematically across stakeholder groups: business associations express greater concern about AI risks in text-based consultations than in survey responses ({g} = +1.0), whereas public authorities and several nonbusiness groups show smaller or negative divergences. Divergences between scores suggest positive spatial autocorrelation across European countries (Moran's I = 0.347, p = 0.036), indicating that stakeholders from neighboring countries tend toward more similar text-based stances towards AI safety concerns. Despite divergence, survey-reported concerns remain strongly associated with support for explainability across all divergence levels. These results demonstrate that LLM annotation reproducibility can coexist with poor construct correspondence and motivate validation procedures that distinguish reproducibility, construct validity, and communication context variation when LLMs are used as measurement instruments.
CliniCIRCA: A Modular LLM Framework for Constructing Longitudinal Mental Health Patient Journeys from Raw EHR Narratives
In mental health care, reasoning over patient journeys is a key task for clinicians. Yet these journeys, encompassing a longitudinal progression of biological, psychological, and social events, are often spread across disparate unstructured text narratives, making temporal recovery challenging. We present CliniCIRCA, a multi-stage LLM framework for Calendar-anchored, Imprecision-aware Reconstruction of Clinical Annals. To our knowledge, CliniCIRCA is the first to temporally classify clinical events across unstructured discharge summaries without event-level timestamps. From 14,882 MIMIC-III mental health admissions, we first construct a benchmark of 52 discharge summaries on which CliniCIRCA produces 15,891 temporally tagged events. After correcting 629 errors based on a clinician-in-the-loop evaluation, we produce verified gold-standard labels. Finally, the corrected timelines drive a temporally grounded summarization stage that compresses each source 1.52 times into a date-grouped chronological record. We then scale the framework to generate 1,000 silver-standard timelines and evaluate them as training data. Compared with zero- and few-shot prompting, instruction tuning generally improves five open-weight models on event extraction, temporal tagging, and summarization across silver and clinician-verified evaluations.
What Counts as a Mistake? Annotating Recitation Events in Quran Memorization Transcripts
Checking Quran recitation from an ASR transcript requires distinguishing unresolved mistakes from repetitions, repairs, opening formulas and accepted spelling differences. We report a completed human annotation of 100 production recording cases: 348 scored units and 162 localized events across ten combined labels. An executable evaluator scores labels and word positions together. A plain diff reaches label-aware F1 0.525 and localization F1 0.826; adapted production cleaner/alignment components reach 0.518 and 0.786, with exact-span F1 0.505 for both. Correcting the adapter's word coordinates recovers all five annotated repetition events, showing why annotation interfaces must be checked before interpreting baseline failures. In a preliminary pilot, eight single 20-minute runs across three coding agents and eight models span label-aware F1 0.143 to 0.892: seven land far above every baseline, and one collapses below the naive diff from a missing normalization step. Across the six, 970 of 972 gold-event instances draw an overlapping prediction, so what remains is not detection but convention: span extent, and the labels whose boundary is stipulated by adjudication rather than visible in the text. Seven of 162 events defeat all six same-day runs, five of them one orthographic rule, and the strongest run still misses the same ones. No run annotated before building, so the pilot measures the algorithm half of the task only.
Extracting Dataset Mentions in Forced Displacement and FCV Documents: A Weakly Supervised Framework with LLM-Based Label Refinement
Development and humanitarian organizations produce and support surveys, administrative registries, and other data resources to inform research, policy, and operations, yet systematically identifying where these datasets are referenced remains difficult. Such references are dispersed across research papers, project documents, humanitarian reports, and other unstructured text, limiting both the ability to trace data use and to identify potential gaps in data availability or dissemination. We present a weakly supervised framework for adapting dataset extraction to forced displacement and Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) documents without first constructing a large manually labeled training corpus. A lightweight model trained on general research literature generates candidate dataset mentions from unlabeled domain documents, which a frontier large language model (LLM) reviews in context, validating or rejecting candidates and correcting their extraction boundaries. The resulting annotations are supplemented with targeted synthetic and contrastive examples and used to fine-tune the lightweight model for large-scale extraction. We evaluate the resulting model on an independent gold-standard benchmark of 1,706 text passages spanning research, humanitarian, and operational documents. Across the full benchmark, the model achieves 74.1% precision and 70.5% recall at the mention level; among passages containing dataset references, precision reaches 89.5%. At the passage level, the model achieves 88.2% accuracy and 88.6% specificity in distinguishing passages with dataset references from those without them. These results demonstrate a practical approach for constructing domain-specific supervision when labeled data are limited, and provide a technical foundation for larger-scale analysis of data use and potential gaps in the displacement data landscape.
Debate-to-Skill: Capability-Bound Process Supervision for Industrial Query-to-Agent Annotation
Industrial query-to-agent matching fails when topical relevance is mistaken for executable capability, especially on long-tail and boundary-sensitive requests. We formulate annotation as \emph{capability-bound process supervision} and instantiate it with Debate-to-Skill, which uses reusable decision principles, structured deliberation, verifier-based verdict extraction, and disagreement-driven refinement. On an industrial Query2Agent benchmark, we compare Debate-to-Skill with direct-label supervision, reasoning-SFT, and structural ablations. The results test whether gains come from supervising the capability-critical decision process itself, especially on grey-zone cases where semantic relatedness and executable capability diverge.
Cross-Lingual Clinical Annotation Projection as Constrained Text Generation: A Six-Language Study
Background: To determine whether cross-lingual clinical annotation projection can be formulated as a text-preserving, document-level generative task that produces verifiable character-level annotations for multilingual clinical corpus construction, and to characterize its robustness and computational trade-offs relative to candidate-based projection pipelines. Methods: We developed a constrained LLM projection workflow that inserts entity tags directly into immutable target-language text, followed by deterministic validation and character-offset reconstruction. We evaluated it alongside supervised candidate-span projection and hybrid ML-LLM refinement for transferring Spanish Disease, Symptom, and Procedure annotations into six languages. Evaluation used MultiClinAI gold standard with strict span matching and character-overlap F1 Results: Direct LLM projection achieved the strongest and most consistent performance. GLM 5.2 obtained a mean Strict F1 of 0.9201 across 18 language-entity combinations, while locally deployable Gemma4:31B achieved 0.9133. The best LLM configuration improved Strict F1 over the previous state of the art in all 18 settings, by 0.0564-0.1512, yielding 55,416 grounded mentions with reconstructed offsets. Conclusions: Direct LLM-based projection enables high-quality multilingual clinical annotation transfer and provides a practical approach for extending clinical NLP resources to languages with fewer annotated datasets and language-specific tools. Combined with local inference and deterministic validation, it can substantially reduce expert time and cost for multilingual clinical corpus construction.
SpeechAnnotator: A Context-Aware Multi-Agent Framework and Benchmark for Multidimensional Speech Annotation
Recent controllable speech generation requires training data with fine-grained annotations of speaker traits, prosody, emotion, paralinguistic cues, acoustic scenes, and context. Existing workflows often rely on manual correction, paid hosted multimodal services, or fixed processing chains, which limits large-scale data processing through annotation cost, external-service dependence, or weak cross-stage recovery. We introduce SpeechAnnotator, a locally deployable, context-aware multi-agent framework built entirely from open-source models and tools. Supporting frontend modules first obtain speaker-aware segments and final segment transcripts, while prior evidence extractors attach heterogeneous segment-level cues. Three specialist agents then collaborate through shared state: the Planning Agent converts local audio evidence, speaker history, neighboring segments, and recording-level context into field-specific contracts; the Labeling Agent performs contract-guided multimodal prediction for directly observable attributes; and the Review Agent runs a bounded review loop that checks evidence support and cross-segment consistency, triggering relabeling only for unsupported or inconsistent fields. To address the fragmentation of existing evaluation resources across isolated tasks and narrow-domain test sets, we introduce SpeechAnnotator-Bench (SA-Bench), containing 8.87 hours of human-annotated audio across nine source formats, together with SpeechAnnotator-Eval (SA-Eval), which separates Timeline-Eval for speaker-aware timeline recovery, Closed-Eval for finite-set attributes, and Open-Eval for open-ended attributes. Experiments and ablations show that SpeechAnnotator provides a locally deployable alternative to commercial audio-capable systems, while the bounded review loop improves multidimensional annotation through evidence- and context-aware field-level recovery.
PersianAnonymizer: Evaluating LLM-Labeled Training for Efficient NER-based Anonymization in Persian
We target practical anonymization of Persian customer chats by training a compact NER model from LLM-labeled supervision and selecting the best labeler for deployment. We compare three instruction-tuned LLMs: DeepSeek-V3-0324, GPT-OSS-120B, and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507, to produce span annotations under a shared JSON protocol, yielding four corpora (OSS_ZeroShot, Qwen_ZeroShot, Qwen_FewShot, DeepSeek_FewShot). A MatinaRoberta-based token-classifier is trained per corpus and evaluated with token-level Precision/Recall/F1 (overall and per-class). We also report Label Coverage Recall (LCR), the proportion of gold non-O tokens predicted as non-O, and quantify cross-labeler behavior via a token-level Venn on test annotations. Finally, we contrast test-set annotation latency of the LLMs on H200 nodes with the trained NER's test-time labeling on a single RTX 3090. Results show that supervision from OSS_ZeroShot yields the strongest macro-F1 and LCR, while the resulting NER labels an entire 40K-message test set in approximately 2 minutes on one consumer GPU. This establishes a practical path to high-quality, low-cost anonymization for Persian industrial data.
Bridging Lexical Divergence: LLM-Assisted, Cost-Efficient, Zero-shot Scientific Entity Linking
Scientific domain entity linking (EL) differs from general domain EL because mentions and entity names often lack lexical overlap. Another challenge is that specialized terminology is used in the scientific domain, which is rarely encountered in models pretrained on general domains. Therefore, models trained on general domains transfer poorly to scientific domains. To address this, in-domain fine-tuning is the natural remedy. However, many scientific domains lack expert-annotated data, motivating the need for a zero-human-annotation approach. Existing zero-shot methods heavily rely on LLMs to generate aliases across entire mention corpora, which incurs substantial computational cost, and those methods provide no mechanism to filter out noise from LLMs. To address these challenges, we propose Sci-ZSEL, a framework that selectively generates entity aliases with an LLM to control computational cost, and applies an ontology-aware filter to remove aliases that semantically drift toward ontology neighbors. Then, filtered aliases are used to construct pseudo-labeled mention-entity pairs for fine-tuning. To enable evaluation of EL under low lexical overlap, we also release a new animal science EL benchmark linked to three livestock trait ontologies, where mentions and entities exhibit substantially lower lexical overlap than in existing benchmarks. Across five benchmarks, Sci-ZSEL outperforms the non-fine-tuned baseline, is most useful on nonoverlapping mentions, and combining it with curated synonyms gives the best performance in most settings.
Error-Type-Aware Loss Reweighting for Robust Named Entity Recognition with Noisy LLM Labels
Large language models are increasingly used to annotate datasets for training smaller, task-specialized models such as named entity recognition. While this method yields effective models, it assumes that the synthetic dataset is correctly annotated. In this work, we find that (i) current fine-tuning processes simply ignore LLM-introduced annotation noise, resulting in degraded performance and (ii) existing noise-robust losses are not transferable to sequence labeling because annotation noise in named entity recognition is heterogeneous: for example, missing mentions and type errors affect the training signal in different ways. Treating all noisy tokens equally in noise-robust losses and applying a single reweighing criterion for all may therefore remove useful supervision or reinforce incorrect labels. To address this limitation, we propose error-type-aware loss reweighting for NER, which introduces separate reweighing rules for different types of potentially erroneous tokens. Our approach is simple and efficient, does not require additional training resources, and improves F1 by 0.8 - 2.0 percentage points on dataset-level average for noise levels between 15% and 40%, with a maximum improvement of 4.6 percentage points with 24.1% noise on Wikigold.
Designing an Auditable LLM-Supported Workflow for Qualitative Thematic Analysis
Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for scaling qualitative analysis, but existing applications often provide limited methodological transparency regarding how qualitative methods are translated into computational procedures. This paper presents an auditable and privacy-preserving computational operationalization of inductive and latent Thematic Analysis (TA). This paper first derives five design principles from the methodological requirements of TA and the conditions introduced by LLM-based inference: preserving interpretative context, maintaining traceable relationships between empirical material and analytical outputs, representing analytical constructs and reasoning explicitly, constraining LLM inference to interpretative tasks, and enabling privacy-preserving local deployment. Second, it presents a proof-of-concept for a two-phase workflow that operationalizes these principles by combining interpretative LLM inference with deterministic procedural control to generate codes, analytical justifications, themes, and theme descriptions while preserving explicit links to the source material. Third, it proposes an evaluation framework combining structural comparison with human-led TA and independent expert assessment of analytical quality. The evaluation is conducted on semi-structured Danish interview transcripts. and the results shows that the workflow produces code-level outputs with coverage broadly comparable to human annotations and highly rated analytical justifications, while generating a more compressed thematic structure characterized by fewer and broader themes. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of auditable LLM-supported TA through a modular workflow designed to scale to larger datasets, accommodate different LLMs, and support transfer across research domains, with domain adaptation primarily requiring adjustments to the prompting strategy.
The Differential Reasoning Router: Operationalizing Cost-Aware LLM Annotation in E-commerce
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to annotate structured product data in e-commerce, but early deployment often begins as a cold-start problem: only limited pre-launch labels are available, the value of expensive reasoning is unknown, and human review is needed before the system can be trusted at scale. This challenge is especially common in rule-based annotation workflows, where each item must satisfy multiple business rules and both model errors and ambiguous rule boundaries affect final decisions. We introduce the Differential Reasoning Router (DRR), a cost-aware framework for cold-start LLM annotation that jointly optimizes model selection and human escalation. Rather than treating a reasoning model as a default fallback, DRR estimates separate success probabilities for a direct model and a reasoning model at both the sample and business-rule levels, enabling adaptive routing: easy cases are handled directly, reasoning is reserved for cases where it is expected to improve the decision, and likely double-failure or rule-disagreement cases are escalated to human annotators. The resulting labels provide targeted ground truth for prompt engineering, supervised fine-tuning, calibration, and rule refinement, enabling a gradual shift from human-heavy cold-start annotation toward high-confidence automated routing. In a production e-commerce workflow, DRR reaches accuracy parity with the strongest confidence-based router while achieving more than 60% reasoning-token cost savings.
Homo-RAG: Homology-Guided Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Cross-Species Gene Function Prediction
The functional annotation of genes in non-model organisms remains a significant challenge in computational biology, with 20-70% of sequenced genes lacking characterized functions. Traditional homology-based methods are often costly and strongly dependent on high sequence similarity. This study presents Homo-RAG, a framework for large language model-based gene function prediction that integrates homology-guided multi-hop retrieval with evidence-aware ranking. The framework exploits biological relationships between zebrafish and human orthologs to guide evidence acquisition from ZFIN, UniProt, and PubMed through hybrid dense and lexical retrieval. An Evidence Confidence Score (ECS) integrates semantic relevance, entity matching, orthology information, source reliability, and literature association signals to refine the ranking of retrieved evidence. Extensive evaluation across 150 queries and 7,200 retrieved documents shows that evidence weighting parameter of lambda=0.50 improves NDCG@10 to 0.9879 and MRR to 0.99, while retrieving relevant evidence for 99.33% of queries. Furthermore, 80% of the retrieved documents are query-exclusive, indicating that evidence quality complements rather than replaces retrieval relevance. These findings establish Homo-RAG as a practical and robust framework for reliable, evidence-grounded gene function prediction in understudied organisms. The study addresses important limitations of conventional annotation pipelines while identifying opportunities for future improvements in evidence features and attribution mechanisms.
Debiased Inference for AI-Generated Data without Gold-Standard Labels: Identification via Multiple Imperfect Measurements
An increasing number of scholars use AI to measure variables they subsequently include in downstream analyses. Although AI-measured variables are often analyzed as if observed without error, ignoring prediction errors in automated measurement leads to substantial bias and invalid confidence intervals in downstream analyses, even if AI measurement accuracy is high, e.g., above 90%. Existing solutions, such as design-based supervised learning and prediction-powered inference, combine error-prone AI-based measurements with gold-standard labels, which may be costly and difficult to obtain in some application areas. In this paper, we propose debiased inference with multiple imperfect measurements (DMM), a framework that combines multiple error-prone AI measurements to enable valid downstream inference without gold-standard labels. Building on the established results on CP decomposition, DMM assumes that these measurements are independent conditional on the latent true label and observed unit-level features, such as text features represented by embeddings. This framework allows for unknown misclassification rates to vary across annotation methods (e.g., large language models) and across units of annotation (e.g., texts). Under this assumption, we use semiparametric inference theory to prove that the DMM estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal, enabling valid inference for a wide range of downstream statistical analyses common in the social sciences. Our simulation results show that DMM yields valid inference and that adding accurate, though imperfect, measurements can improve efficiency. Focusing on common applications of large language model annotations, we also develop diagnostics to assess the conditional independence assumption.
H2: A Dual Hybrid Semantic Data Lake Architecture for Medical Data Harmonization with Human-In-the-Loop verified, LLM Driven Metadata Annotation System
Medical data, by its nature, exhibit a high degree of heterogeneity on multiple levels ranging from (a) different modalities like images, text and time series, (b) diverse tabular schemata introduced by institutions and (c) completely unstructured textual information data provided by healthcare professionals. Data lakes are often used in medical data storage to consolidate all heterogeneous diverse data in a single, central location, where it can be saved "as is", without the need to impose a schema like a data warehouse does. Despite their flexibility, though, data lakes are notorious for the "data swamp" failure. Thus, providing a reliable data harmonization mechanism through metadata, without compromising integrity or flexibility, is a real challenge. To this end, knowledge graphs have attracted attention since they provide a dynamic way to depict relationships without a rigid schema-on-write approach. Additionally, another rigorous task relies on the interoperability of data: application of appropriate ML techniques on such a diverse nature of data is not an easy task, as a domain expert must decide the efficacy of a method to a specific data type or dataset. Metadata annotation can aid by tagging applicable operations, however this requires manual intervention, not to mention the plethora of existing datasets which lack such information. To tackle both challenges, in this paper, we propose a semantic data lake architecture that promotes data harmonization and incorporates a generative annotation process (i.e. LLMs) of non-labeled metadata collections to support the application of meaningful ML techniques. Building on top of this approach, we create a higher level of knowledge, identifying suitability of data with respect to applicable ML operations based on their data nature...
ArtAnno: Annotating Implicit Semantics in Artworks through LLM Agent-Driven Bidirectional Human-AI Augmentation
High-quality annotation of artworks is essential for computational art research, yet extracting implicit semantics remains challenging due to the reliance on culturally grounded meanings and deep contextual knowledge behind the images. Current AI-assisted annotation tools often lack assistance or rely on one-way workflows where experts have to perform extra manual calibrations to improve AI models, resulting in limited efficiency. To address this, we propose Bidirectional Human-AI Augmentation(BiHAA), a closed-loop framework in which skills and domain knowledge base evolve through real-time interaction and bidirectional HAI augmentation. Informed by a formative study with 20 artwork annotators from different backgrounds, we implement this framework in ArtAnno, an artwork annotation system driven by a multi-agent architecture. The system includes a Proactive Agentic Support Module, where AI augments humans through semantic mining and label suggestion, and an Interaction-Driven Evolution Module, where human expertise continuously enhances the AI through distilling annotation trajectories into reusable experience. Evaluation through a user study and two case studies demonstrates that our framework and system improve annotation efficiency, enable knowledge accumulation, and reduce the effort of information seeking and verification for annotators with limited domain expertise. We conclude by discussing broader implications and future directions.
Agreement Is Not Quality: Blind Expert Verification of Human and LLM Qualitative Coding When Human Consensus Is Not Ground Truth
Evaluations of LLM-assisted qualitative coding almost universally measure model performance as agreement with human coders, a practice that presumes human coding is the standard to approximate. This study provides empirical evidence that the presumption fails in ways agreement metrics cannot detect. Five LLM systems and three trained human coders independently applied a 72-item hierarchical codebook to 2,560 educator messages from a K-12 AI platform. Beyond conventional agreement analysis, an independent domain expert judged 855 pairwise comparisons of code sets blind to source, treating human and machine sources symmetrically. The two evaluation approaches diverge in both directions. Human-LLM agreement (mean Jaccard 0.30) falls well below human-human agreement (0.52), which standard practice would read as inferior LLM coding, yet the blind verifier preferred human and LLM coding at indistinguishable rates (51.5% vs. 48.5%, p = 0.537), and a Bradley-Terry ranking placed two LLMs above two of three human coders. For several substantive codes, human consensus encoded shared bias that the verifier rejected in favor of the LLM interpretation. Agreement-based evaluation is therefore insufficient for automation decisions, and the study demonstrates a transferable verification protocol and a code-level division-of-labor framework.
Human-LLM Collaborative Inductive Coding for Conceptualizing K-12 Educator AI Use
Qualitative researchers increasingly encounter interaction corpora whose scale exceeds what manual coding alone can address, and large language models (LLMs) are frequently proposed as analytic assistants. The open questions are not whether LLMs can participate in qualitative analysis but to what extent, in what phases, and under what safeguards. This article provides a detailed procedural account of a multi-phase human-LLM collaborative pipeline that adapted open, axial, and selective coding to develop a hierarchical codebook from 45,000 messages exchanged between K-12 educators and a generative AI platform. Across three phases, LLMs generated candidate labels and structured annotations at scale, while human researchers retained conceptual authority over category definitions, merging decisions, and interpretive frameworks. The resulting instrument was then tested through systematic human coding, in which three trained coders with educational domain expertise applied the codebook to an independent sample of 2,560 messages, established reliability through iterative calibration using set-valued agreement measures appropriate for multi-label annotation, and extended the instrument with five codes that the LLM-assisted phases had not surfaced. The final codebook comprises 72 items within 19 categories and six domains. We reflect on the methodological decisions the pipeline required, including the choice of a conversational unit of analysis, the treatment of the LLM as a labeling instrument rather than an interpretive agent, the measurement of intercoder agreement under multi-label coding, and the conditions under which human domain expertise remained decisive. The account is offered as an auditable template for qualitative researchers considering LLM assistance in codebook development while preserving human interpretive authority.