analiza aiqbench
This research investigates how batch processing versus individual inference impacts LLM performance when screening studies in systematic reviews, specifically addressing class imbalance issues. The findings reveal that while prevalence metadata offers little benefit, the method of batching significantly alters decision-making behaviors depending on data distribution, suggesting a need to evaluate computational efficiency alongside behavioral consistency.
Class Imbalance and Batch Effects in LLM-Based Screening for Systematic Reviews
arXiv:2608.14737v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This study analyses LLMs in imbalanced binary classification, using study screening in systematic reviews as the application domain. An experiment was conducted in five reviews, comparing individual and batch processing, with and without prevalence metadata. The results indicate a limited influence of the prevalence metadata, with no evidence that it improves performance. In contrast, batch processing produced larger behavioral changes that varied according to the prevalence of the class. The aggregate and item-level analyses did not always coincide. Therefore, batch processing should be evaluated not only in terms of cost, but also in relation to its effects on decision-making behavior.
Abstract:This study analyses LLMs in imbalanced binary classification, using study screening in systematic reviews as the application domain. An experiment was conducted in five reviews, comparing individual and batch processing, with and without prevalence metadata. The results indicate a limited influence of the prevalence metadata, with no evidence that it improves performance. In contrast, batch processing produced larger behavioral changes that varied according to the prevalence of the class. The aggregate and item-level analyses did not always coincide. Therefore, batch processing should be evaluated not only in terms of cost, but also in relation to its effects on decision-making behavior.
12 pages, 4 figures. Accepted at ENIAC 2026 (National Meeting on Artificial and Computational Intelligence), part of BRACIS 2026
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.14737 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.14737v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.14737 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 217 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
[AINews] High Taste Testers Ep. 1
Latent Space · 17 oct. 2026

Article: Governing AI in the Cloud: A Practical Guide for Architects
InfoQ · 15 iun. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 18 sept. 2026
A Benchmark Framework for Screening Automation in Systematic Reviews
arXiv · 28 sept. 2026