跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1164新增论文
+869其中 AI 相关
+88已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 04:56 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 05:37 — 2026-11-06 05:37(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-06 04:56最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-06 04:54(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.04342

Beyond Fine-Tuning: Evaluating Prompt Engineering and Prompt Tuning for Roman Urdu Hate Speech Detection

Toneema Zubair, Muhammad Junaid Asif, Faisal Kamiran, Hafiz Hassan Saeed, Rana Fayyaz Ahmad

Low Resource Languages (LRLs) pose significant challenges for hate speech detection because of a scarcity of readily available annotated data, language variation, non-standard spelling, and context-dependent ambiguity. Beyond the problem of informal conventions of writing in Roman Urdu, there is also the issue of code-mixing. After working on the previous project about zero-shot learning and parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT), this research systematically compares prompt engineering and prompt tuning for Roman Urdu hate speech detection. To study the effect of in-context examples, we will compare the zero-shot and few-shot prompting approaches. To understand the advantage of structured prompting and learnable prompt representations, we will conduct studies of manual vs. mixed prompt-based adaptation strategies. Experimentations are carried out on the PURUT dataset (~72,771 social media comments) with GPT-3.5, LLaMA-3, Mistral-7B, and multilingual BERT in several settings. Experimental results show that few-shot prompting always outperforms zero-shot prompting, with the Mistral-7B model scoring 0.67 F1 compared to 0.56 of the zero-shot models. Based on this observation, prompt-based adaptation is proposed to introduce additional improvements, with the proposed mixed prompt configuration able to yield a F1-score up to 0.87 which further surpasses the performance of regular manual prompts. Despite the larger size of the model, its performance trade-off between inference-based prompting, prompt optimization, and parameter-efficient model adaptation is compared to the previously reported PEFT-based F1-score, which is ~0.93.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.AI
arXiv ↗PDF ↗