# Towards Smarter Hiring: Are Zero-Shot and Few-Shot Pre-trained LLMs Ready for HR Spoken Interview Transcript Analysis?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.05683 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.05683/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Robust Speech Recognition via Large-Scale Weak Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.04356/) (2022)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [What all do audio transformer models hear? Probing Acoustic Representations for Language Delivery and its Structure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.00387/) (2021)
- [Speaker-Conditioned Hierarchical Modeling for Automated Speech Scoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.00928/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This research paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the performance of prominent pre-trained large language models (LLMs), including GPT-4 Turbo, GPT-3.5 Turbo, text-davinci-003, text-babbage-001, text-curie-001, text-ada-001, llama-2-7b-chat, llama-2-13b-chat, and llama-2-70b-chat, in comparison to expert human evaluators in providing scores, identifying errors, and offering feedback and improvement suggestions to candidates during mock HR (Human Resources) interviews. We introduce a dataset called HURIT (Human Resource Interview Transcripts), which comprises 3,890 HR interview transcripts sourced from real-world HR interview scenarios. Our findings reveal that pre-trained LLMs, particularly GPT-4 Turbo and GPT-3.5 Turbo, exhibit commendable performance and are capable of producing evaluations comparable to those of expert human evaluators. Although these LLMs demonstrate proficiency in providing scores comparable to human experts in terms of human evaluation metrics, they frequently fail to identify errors and offer specific actionable advice for candidate performance improvement in HR interviews. Our research suggests that the current state-of-the-art pre-trained LLMs are not fully conducive for automatic deployment in an HR interview assessment. Instead, our findings advocate for a human-in-the-loop approach, to incorporate manual checks for inconsistencies and provisions for improving feedback quality as a more suitable strategy.