2025· Italian Journal of Computational Linguistics· 0 citations
TL;DR
Comparing human annotations with outputs from generative large language models and examining their alignment with theoretical models of textuality show how computational approaches can shed light on linguistic theories and, vice versa, how linguistic theories can guide the application of computational resources.
Abstract
This article presents a study on annotating explicit discourse relations in Italian student essays, comparing human annotations with outputs from generative large language models and examining their alignment with theoretical models of textuality. We review prior work on automatic discourse relation annotation in Italian, highlighting limitations in language coverage, especially in out-of-domain scenarios and how these have been addressed. Our experiments explore the use of generative models to mitigate the scarcity of domain-specific training data, while assessing their ability to reflect the intended theoretical framework. We evaluate two generative models in detecting connectives and classifying their senses, comparing results to human annotation. For our evaluation sample, we use a string-matching algorithm combined with a rule-based approach to pre-annotate essays with possible connective forms and their senses, based on their presence in the Lexicon of Italian Connectives (LICO). These annotations were manually corrected by two expert annotators, resulting in a publicly available evaluation sample. The study raises significant theoretical questions about the definition of connectives, its relationship to text segmentation and the challenges both human and machines face when annotating discourse relations. Our findings show how computational approaches can shed light on linguistic theories and, vice versa, how linguistic theories can guide the application of computational resources.
In this paper, we draw a comparison between linguists in training, a trained linguist, and annotations generated by large language models (LLMs) to find out if they struggle with complex linguistic phenomena in a similar way. For this purpose, we analyse evaluative language in spoken popular science discourse, with the...
The affect heuristic is the most frequent heuristic pattern in the corpus, occurring more often than confirmation bias, availability heuristic, or representativeness heuristic, and agreement measures robust to prevalence effects indicate substantial consistency among annotators.
Paulina Żelewska, Barbara Konat· Człowiek i społeczeństwo· 0 citations
This work shows that a common approach to representing argument structure as trees is not sufficient to capture the constellations of argument components in student essays, and proposes a suitable extension of that scheme, which is applied to an initial corpus of 50 essays.
Xiaoyu Bai, Kemal Afzal, Dietmar Benndorf et al.· Argument & Computation· 1 citation
The findings have implications for LLM use in science communication and NLG and provide insight on the difficulties of creating operationalizable guidelines for German comprehensible language.
It is argued that the notions of authenticity and representativeness as key features of linguistic corpora are compatible with the integration of AI-generated texts in linguistic corpora with a pragmatic practical suggestion for future corpus projects.
The study comes to the conclusion that AI is a powerful instrument for confirming frequency-based linguistic theory but does not model the human cognitive journey.
Assis Lect Batool Abdul-Mohsin Miri· Journal of College of Educat...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.