Complementary Learning Approach for Text Classification using Large Language Models

arXiv ID: 2512.07583v1

Published: 2025-12-08

Authors: Navid Asgari, Benjamin M. Cole

Categories: cs.CL, cs.AI

Relevance Score: 0.75 / 1.00

View on arXiv Download PDF

Summary

This study proposes a cost-efficient and structured methodology for text classification that integrates the strengths of Large Language Models (LLMs) with human expertise, mitigating their respective weaknesses. Utilizing chain-of-thought and few-shot learning, the approach enables human scholars to apply abductive reasoning to interrogate both machine and human contributions, demonstrating its utility in analyzing discrepancies within pharmaceutical alliance press releases.

Medical Relevance

This methodology offers a robust and cost-effective approach for analyzing large volumes of medical and health-related text, such as pharmaceutical press releases, clinical trial reports, research literature, or regulatory documents, by ensuring higher accuracy and interpretability through intelligent human-LLM collaboration.

AI Health Application

The AI methodology is demonstrated by analyzing press releases about pharmaceutical alliances. This application allows for the classification and interrogation of information within the pharmaceutical sector, potentially enabling insights into drug development partnerships, market trends, competitive intelligence, or strategic collaborations that impact healthcare and medical advancements. The focus on managing LLM weaknesses highlights an effort to make AI applications more reliable and transparent in critical domains like pharmaceuticals.

Key Points

Proposes a 'complementary learning' methodology for text classification, combining LLMs with human scholars in a cost-efficient manner.
Integrates computer science techniques like chain-of-thought and few-shot learning prompting.
Extends best practices from qualitative research co-author teams to quantitative human-machine teams.
Empowers humans to use abductive reasoning and natural language to interrogate both LLM outputs and their own inputs/decisions.
Highlights how to manage inherent weaknesses of LLMs through careful, low-cost human oversight and interaction.
Demonstrates the methodology's application in resolving human-machine rating discrepancies for 1,934 pharmaceutical alliance press releases (1990-2017).
Aims for a parsimonious use of LLMs by focusing human intervention where it adds most value.

Methodology

The methodology employs a 'complementary learning' approach, structuring human-LLM collaboration for text classification. It leverages computer science prompting techniques, specifically 'chain-of-thought' and 'few-shot learning', to guide LLMs. Humans utilize abductive reasoning and natural language to scrutinize outputs and inputs from both the LLM and themselves, extending principles of co-authorship to human-machine quantitative teams.

Key Findings

The study demonstrates the practical application of the proposed methodology in interrogating and resolving human-machine rating discrepancies. Specifically, it showcased how this collaborative approach can be used to analyze a dataset of 1,934 press releases concerning pharmaceutical alliances, thereby managing LLM weaknesses with careful, low-cost human techniques.

Clinical Impact

While not directly clinical, the methodology has significant practical impact in medical and health fields. It can improve the reliability and interpretability of automated text analysis for applications like drug safety monitoring from adverse event reports, classifying medical literature for systematic reviews, identifying trends in pharmaceutical market activity, or even streamlining regulatory document review, ultimately leading to more informed decisions in healthcare management and policy.

Limitations

The abstract does not explicitly state limitations. However, it focuses on demonstrating the methodology on a specific dataset (pharmaceutical press releases), implying that broader generalizability to all medical text types or specific clinical contexts might require further validation.

Future Directions

Future research directions are not explicitly mentioned in the abstract. However, based on the proposed methodology, potential avenues could include applying the method to diverse medical text classification tasks (e.g., clinical notes, patient forums, scientific articles), evaluating its performance against purely automated or purely human methods across various metrics, and exploring its scalability in larger, more complex datasets.

Medical Domains

Pharmaceutical Industry Drug Development Regulatory Affairs Health Policy Medical Research Public Health

Keywords

Large Language Models Text Classification Human-in-the-loop AI Complementary Learning Chain-of-Thought Few-shot Learning Pharmaceutical Alliances Abductive Reasoning

Abstract

In this study, we propose a structured methodology that utilizes large language models (LLMs) in a cost-efficient and parsimonious manner, integrating the strengths of scholars and machines while offsetting their respective weaknesses. Our methodology, facilitated through a chain of thought and few-shot learning prompting from computer science, extends best practices for co-author teams in qualitative research to human-machine teams in quantitative research. This allows humans to utilize abductive reasoning and natural language to interrogate not just what the machine has done but also what the human has done. Our method highlights how scholars can manage inherent weaknesses OF LLMs using careful, low-cost techniques. We demonstrate how to use the methodology to interrogate human-machine rating discrepancies for a sample of 1,934 press releases announcing pharmaceutical alliances (1990-2017).

Comments

67 pages