English

LLMs vs Established Text Augmentation Techniques for Classification: When do the Benefits Outweight the Costs?

Computation and Language 2024-08-30 v1

Abstract

The generative large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used for data augmentation tasks, where text samples are LLM-paraphrased and then used for classifier fine-tuning. However, a research that would confirm a clear cost-benefit advantage of LLMs over more established augmentation methods is largely missing. To study if (and when) is the LLM-based augmentation advantageous, we compared the effects of recent LLM augmentation methods with established ones on 6 datasets, 3 classifiers and 2 fine-tuning methods. We also varied the number of seeds and collected samples to better explore the downstream model accuracy space. Finally, we performed a cost-benefit analysis and show that LLM-based methods are worthy of deployment only when very small number of seeds is used. Moreover, in many cases, established methods lead to similar or better model accuracies.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2408.16502,
  title  = {LLMs vs Established Text Augmentation Techniques for Classification: When do the Benefits Outweight the Costs?},
  author = {Jan Cegin and Jakub Simko and Peter Brusilovsky},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.16502},
  year   = {2024}
}

Comments

20 pages

R2 v1 2026-06-28T18:27:38.320Z