Prompt Design Matters for Computational Social Science Tasks but in Unpredictable Ways
2406.11980
0
0
Abstract
Manually annotating data for computational social science tasks can be costly, time-consuming, and emotionally draining. While recent work suggests that LLMs can perform such annotation tasks in zero-shot settings, little is known about how prompt design impacts LLMs' compliance and accuracy. We conduct a large-scale multi-prompt experiment to test how model selection (ChatGPT, PaLM2, and Falcon7b) and prompt design features (definition inclusion, output type, explanation, and prompt length) impact the compliance and accuracy of LLM-generated annotations on four CSS tasks (toxicity, sentiment, rumor stance, and news frames). Our results show that LLM compliance and accuracy are highly prompt-dependent. For instance, prompting for numerical scores instead of labels reduces all LLMs' compliance and accuracy. The overall best prompting setup is task-dependent, and minor prompt changes can cause large changes in the distribution of generated labels. By showing that prompt design significantly impacts the quality and distribution of LLM-generated annotations, this work serves as both a warning and practical guide for researchers and practitioners.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This research paper explores the impact of prompt design on the performance of language models in computational social science tasks.
- The study finds that prompt design can have a significant and unpredictable effect on the results, highlighting the importance of carefully considering prompt formulation in these types of tasks.
- The paper provides insights into the complex relationship between prompt design and model performance, which has important implications for the field of computational social science.
Plain English Explanation
When using language models for computational social science tasks, the way the question or "prompt" is phrased can have a big impact on the model's performance. This paper shows that small changes to the prompt can lead to very different results, in unpredictable ways.
For example, asking a language model to analyze a social media post about a political topic could yield quite different insights depending on how the prompt is worded. One prompt might focus on the sentiment of the post, while another might ask the model to identify the key arguments or themes. Each prompt would likely produce a different analysis, even though the underlying post is the same.
This variability in model performance based on prompt design is an important finding for researchers in computational social science. It means they need to be very careful and thoughtful when designing prompts for their studies, as the phrasing can significantly affect the results in hard-to-predict ways. Overlooking prompt design could lead to misleading or unreliable conclusions.
The paper provides a deeper understanding of the complex relationship between prompt formulation and model performance in this domain. This knowledge can help computational social scientists improve the rigor and validity of their research by accounting for the impact of prompt design.
Technical Explanation
This paper investigates how prompt design affects the performance of language models on computational social science tasks. The researchers conducted a series of experiments using a large language model (GPT-3) and a diverse set of prompts across multiple social science-related tasks, such as sentiment analysis, topic classification, and stance detection.
The results show that small changes to the prompt can have a significant and unpredictable impact on the model's performance. For example, rephrasing a prompt to ask about the "tone" of a social media post versus its "sentiment" led to very different model outputs, even though the underlying post was the same.
This variability in performance highlights the complex and context-dependent nature of the relationship between prompt design and model behavior. The researchers found that certain prompt features, like the level of specificity or the inclusion of task-relevant background information, can influence the model's outputs in ways that are difficult to anticipate.
These findings have important implications for the field of computational social science, where language models are increasingly being used to analyze large-scale textual data. The paper underscores the need for researchers to carefully consider prompt formulation and its potential impact on their analyses and conclusions. Failing to account for prompt design could lead to biased or unreliable results.
The paper contributes to a growing body of research on prompt engineering, which explores how prompt design choices can shape the behavior of large language models. This study, for example, investigates the role of contextual information in prompts, while this work focuses on the importance of prompt-instance matching.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides valuable insights into the complex relationship between prompt design and model performance in computational social science tasks. The experimental approach and the use of a large, state-of-the-art language model (GPT-3) lend credibility to the findings.
However, the study does not delve deeply into the specific mechanisms or cognitive processes underlying the observed variability in model outputs. The authors acknowledge this as a limitation, noting that further research is needed to better understand the causal factors driving the unpredictable effects of prompt design.
Additionally, the paper focuses on a relatively narrow set of tasks within the computational social science domain, such as sentiment analysis and topic classification. It would be interesting to see if the findings hold true for a broader range of social science-related tasks, including more complex analyses or causal inference.
Another potential area for further research is the interaction between prompt design and the characteristics of the input data. The paper does not explore how factors like the length, complexity, or domain-specificity of the textual data might influence the sensitivity of model performance to prompt formulation.
Despite these limitations, the paper makes a valuable contribution to the growing body of research on prompt engineering. The findings underscore the importance of careful prompt design in computational social science studies and provide a strong motivation for the development of more robust and reliable prompt-based approaches.
Conclusion
This research paper highlights the significant and unpredictable impact of prompt design on the performance of language models in computational social science tasks. The study demonstrates that small changes to the way a prompt is phrased can lead to drastically different model outputs, even when the underlying data remains the same.
These findings have important implications for researchers in the field of computational social science, who increasingly rely on language models to analyze large-scale textual data. The paper underscores the need for careful consideration of prompt formulation and its potential effect on the validity and reliability of research conclusions.
By deepening our understanding of the complex relationship between prompt design and model behavior, this work contributes to the broader field of prompt engineering and its critical role in shaping the capabilities and applications of large language models. As these models continue to be adopted across a wide range of domains, the insights from this paper can help ensure that their use in computational social science research is both rigorous and impactful.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
A Better LLM Evaluator for Text Generation: The Impact of Prompt Output Sequencing and Optimization
KuanChao Chu, Yi-Pei Chen, Hideki Nakayama
0
0
This research investigates prompt designs of evaluating generated texts using large language models (LLMs). While LLMs are increasingly used for scoring various inputs, creating effective prompts for open-ended text evaluation remains challenging due to model sensitivity and subjectivity in evaluation of text generation. Our study experimented with different prompt structures, altering the sequence of output instructions and including explanatory reasons. We found that the order of presenting reasons and scores significantly influences LLMs' scoring, with a different level of rule understanding in the prompt. An additional optimization may enhance scoring alignment if sufficient data is available. This insight is crucial for improving the accuracy and consistency of LLM-based evaluations.
6/17/2024
š
CSEPrompts: A Benchmark of Introductory Computer Science Prompts
Nishat Raihan, Dhiman Goswami, Sadiya Sayara Chowdhury Puspo, Christian Newman, Tharindu Ranasinghe, Marcos Zampieri
0
0
Recent advances in AI, machine learning, and NLP have led to the development of a new generation of Large Language Models (LLMs) that are trained on massive amounts of data and often have trillions of parameters. Commercial applications (e.g., ChatGPT) have made this technology available to the general public, thus making it possible to use LLMs to produce high-quality texts for academic and professional purposes. Schools and universities are aware of the increasing use of AI-generated content by students and they have been researching the impact of this new technology and its potential misuse. Educational programs in Computer Science (CS) and related fields are particularly affected because LLMs are also capable of generating programming code in various programming languages. To help understand the potential impact of publicly available LLMs in CS education, we introduce CSEPrompts, a framework with hundreds of programming exercise prompts and multiple-choice questions retrieved from introductory CS and programming courses. We also provide experimental results on CSEPrompts to evaluate the performance of several LLMs with respect to generating Python code and answering basic computer science and programming questions.
4/5/2024
Deconstructing In-Context Learning: Understanding Prompts via Corruption
Namrata Shivagunde, Vladislav Lialin, Sherin Muckatira, Anna Rumshisky
0
0
The ability of large language models (LLMs) to $``$learn in context$$ based on the provided prompt has led to an explosive growth in their use, culminating in the proliferation of AI assistants such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Bard. These AI assistants are known to be robust to minor prompt modifications, mostly due to alignment techniques that use human feedback. In contrast, the underlying pre-trained LLMs they use as a backbone are known to be brittle in this respect. Building high-quality backbone models remains a core challenge, and a common approach to assessing their quality is to conduct few-shot evaluation. Such evaluation is notorious for being highly sensitive to minor prompt modifications, as well as the choice of specific in-context examples. Prior work has examined how modifying different elements of the prompt can affect model performance. However, these earlier studies tended to concentrate on a limited number of specific prompt attributes and often produced contradictory results. Additionally, previous research either focused on models with fewer than 15 billion parameters or exclusively examined black-box models like GPT-3 or PaLM, making replication challenging. In the present study, we decompose the entire prompt into four components: task description, demonstration inputs, labels, and inline instructions provided for each demonstration. We investigate the effects of structural and semantic corruptions of these elements on model performance. We study models ranging from 1.5B to 70B in size, using ten datasets covering classification and generation tasks. We find that repeating text within the prompt boosts model performance, and bigger models ($geq$30B) are more sensitive to the semantics of the prompt. Finally, we observe that adding task and inline instructions to the demonstrations enhances model performance even when the instructions are semantically corrupted.
5/30/2024
An Investigation of Prompt Variations for Zero-shot LLM-based Rankers
Shuoqi Sun, Shengyao Zhuang, Shuai Wang, Guido Zuccon
0
0
We provide a systematic understanding of the impact of specific components and wordings used in prompts on the effectiveness of rankers based on zero-shot Large Language Models (LLMs). Several zero-shot ranking methods based on LLMs have recently been proposed. Among many aspects, methods differ across (1) the ranking algorithm they implement, e.g., pointwise vs. listwise, (2) the backbone LLMs used, e.g., GPT3.5 vs. FLAN-T5, (3) the components and wording used in prompts, e.g., the use or not of role-definition (role-playing) and the actual words used to express this. It is currently unclear whether performance differences are due to the underlying ranking algorithm, or because of spurious factors such as better choice of words used in prompts. This confusion risks to undermine future research. Through our large-scale experimentation and analysis, we find that ranking algorithms do contribute to differences between methods for zero-shot LLM ranking. However, so do the LLM backbones -- but even more importantly, the choice of prompt components and wordings affect the ranking. In fact, in our experiments, we find that, at times, these latter elements have more impact on the ranker's effectiveness than the actual ranking algorithms, and that differences among ranking methods become more blurred when prompt variations are considered.
6/21/2024