# Enhancing Text Annotation through Rationale-Driven Collaborative Few-Shot Prompting

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.09615 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.09615/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Sep 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01652/) (2021)
- [Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1509.01626/) (2015)
- [ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15056/) (2023)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.01219/) (2023)
- [AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10848/) (2023)
- [Is GPT-3 a Good Data Annotator?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10450/) (2022)
- [#InsTag: Instruction Tagging for Analyzing Supervised Fine-tuning of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07074/) (2023)
- [Automated Annotation with Generative AI Requires Validation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00176/) (2023)
- [Improving In-Context Few-Shot Learning via Self-Supervised Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.01703/) (2022)
- [Testing the Reliability of ChatGPT for Text Annotation and Classification: A Cautionary Remark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11085/) (2023)
- [A Comparative Study on Annotation Quality of Crowdsourcing and LLM via Label Aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.09760/) (2024)
- [Evaluation of ChatGPT on Biomedical Tasks: A Zero-Shot Comparison with Fine-Tuned Generative Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04504/) (2023)
- [Brainstorming Brings Power to Large Language Models of Knowledge Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06561/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Demonstration Selection for In-Context Learning via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.03966/) (2024)
- [From LLM-anation to LLM-orchestrator: Coordinating Small Models for Data Labeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.16393/) (2025)
- [A Fully Automated Pipeline for Conversational Discourse Annotation: Tree Scheme Generation and Labeling with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.08961/) (2025)
- [Meta-Sel: Efficient Demonstration Selection for In-Context Learning via Supervised Meta-Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.12123/) (2026)
- [EVGeoQA: Benchmarking LLMs on Dynamic, Multi-Objective Geo-Spatial Exploration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.07070/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The traditional data annotation process is often labor-intensive, time-consuming, and susceptible to human bias, which complicates the management of increasingly complex datasets. This study explores the potential of large language models (LLMs) as automated data annotators to improve efficiency and consistency in annotation tasks. By employing rationale-driven collaborative few-shot prompting techniques, we aim to improve the performance of LLMs in text annotation. We conduct a rigorous evaluation of six LLMs across four benchmark datasets, comparing seven distinct methodologies. Our results demonstrate that collaborative methods consistently outperform traditional few-shot techniques and other baseline approaches, particularly in complex annotation tasks. Our work provides valuable insights and a robust framework for leveraging collaborative learning methods to tackle challenging text annotation tasks.