mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On Prompt Sensitivity of ChatGPT in Affective Computing

arXiv 2403.14006 ↗First posted 20 Mar 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent studies have demonstrated the emerging capabilities of foundation models like ChatGPT in several fields, including affective computing. However, accessing these emerging capabilities is facilitated through prompt engineering. Despite the existence of some prompting techniques, the field is still rapidly evolving and many prompting ideas still require investigation. In this work, we introduce a method to evaluate and investigate the sensitivity of the performance of foundation models based on different prompts or generation parameters. We perform our evaluation on ChatGPT within the scope of affective computing on three major problems, namely sentiment analysis, toxicity detection, and sarcasm detection. First, we carry out a sensitivity analysis on pivotal parameters in auto-regressive text generation, specifically the temperature parameter T and the top-p parameter in Nucleus sampling, dictating how conservative or creative the model should be during generation. Furthermore, we explore the efficacy of several prompting ideas, where we explore how giving different incentives or structures affect the performance. Our evaluation takes into consideration performance measures on the affective computing tasks, and the effectiveness of the model to follow the stated instructions, hence generating easy-to-parse responses to be smoothly used in downstream applications.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2024.

Builds on

18 of 27 references.

References · 18

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  3. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  4. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  5. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  6. 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,155
  7. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
  8. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  9. 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,122
  10. 2023Large Language Models as Optimizerscited by 830
  11. 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 778
  12. 2023How Good Are GPT Models at Machine Translation? A Comprehensive Evaluationcited by 344
6 more
  1. 2022Can large language models reason about medical questions?cited by 194
  2. 2023A Survey of Large Language Models for Healthcare: from Data, Technology, and Applications to Accountability and Ethicscited by 162
  3. 2024On Prompt-Driven Safeguarding for Large Language Modelscited by 109
  4. 2023Will Affective Computing Emerge from Foundation Models and General AI? A First Evaluation on ChatGPTcited by 41
  5. 2023A Wide Evaluation of ChatGPT on Affective Computing Taskscited by 30
  6. 2023Can ChatGPT's Responses Boost Traditional Natural Language Processing?cited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

7 papers.