mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Researchers waste 80% of LLM annotation costs by classifying one text at a time

arXiv 2604.03684 ↗First posted 4 Apr 2026cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used for text classification across the social sciences, yet researchers overwhelmingly classify one text per variable per prompt. Coding 100,000 texts on four variables requires 400,000 API calls. Batching 25 items and stacking all variables into a single prompt reduces this to 4,000 calls, cutting token costs by over 80%. Whether this degrades coding quality is unknown. We tested eight production LLMs from four providers on 3,962 expert-coded tweets across four tasks, varying batch size from 1 to 1,000 items and stacking up to 25 coding dimensions per prompt. Six of eight models maintained accuracy within 2 pp of the single-item baseline through batch sizes of 100. Variable stacking with up to 10 dimensions produced results comparable to single-variable coding, with degradation driven by task complexity rather than prompt length. Within this safe operating range, the measurement error from batching and stacking is smaller than typical inter-coder disagreement in the ground-truth data.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Apr 2026.

Builds on

2 of 16 references.

References · 2

  1. 2025Large Language Model Hacking: Quantifying the Hidden Risks of Using LLMs for Text Annotationcited by 50
  2. 2025Measuring Negative Campaigning across Languages with Large Language Models: A Study of 18 Million Tweets in 19 Countriescited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.