ArticleScientific reports2026
A zero-shot prompt learning approach on fine-grained text classification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decoding Clinician Authorial Style: A Style-Informed Pipeline for Clinical Document Summary Generation with Large Language Models.Research square · 2026Article
- Improving LLM-based event extraction with annotation guidelines.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fine-grained classification of social media texts in the military domain is crucial for public opinion analysis yet remains challenging. This is primarily due to the scarcity of high-quality annotated data, the need for deep domain knowledge, and the complexity of processing long-context documents. To solve these problems, this paper proposes a novel framework that combines text screening with prompt learning. Specifically, we first introduce a method that fuses a domain-specific lexicon and an improved Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) algorithm to efficiently screen military texts. Subsequently, we design a structured prompting strategy that systematically injects detailed category definitions, boundary constraints, and decision principles into the Large Language Model (LLM) to guide zero-shot reasoning. Experimental results on a rigorously annotated gold-standard test set demonstrate that the framework, when combined with the Deepseek-Reasoner model, achieves a macro-F1 score of 89.69%, representing a 19.82% improvement over the baseline prompt. Notably, reasoning-optimized models significantly outperform dialogue-optimized models in adhering to complex domain rules, with a 9.33% higher F1-score. These findings confirm the framework’s robust efficacy in low-resource settings, providing a reliable technical solution for analyzing highly specialized military texts and guiding model selection for other domain-specific tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.