Large Language Models (LLMs) have been frequently used as automatic annotators for tasks such as Text Emotion Recognition (TER). We consider a scenario in which annotators assign at least one emotion label from a large set of options to a text snippet. For this emotion tagging task, we propose a novel zero-shot algorithm that leverages Best-Worst Scaling (BWS), prompting the LLM to choose the least and most suitable emotions for a given text from several label subsets. The LLM’s choices can be represented by a graph linking labels via worse-than relations. Random walks on this graph yield the final score for each label. We compare our algorithm with naive prompting approaches as well as an established BWS-based method. Extensive experiments demonstrate the suitability of the method. It proves to compare favorably to the benchmarks in terms of both accuracy and calibration with respect to human annotations. Moreover, our algorithm’s automatic annotations are shown to be suitable for finetuning lightweight emotion classification models. The proposed method consumes considerably fewer computational resources than the established BWS approach.

Telling stories is an integral part of human communication which can evoke emotions and influence the affective states of the audience. Automatically modeling emotional trajectories in stories has thus attracted considerable scholarly interest. However, as most existing works have been limited to unsupervised dictionary-based approaches, there is no benchmark for this task. We address this gap by introducing continuous valence and arousal labels for an existing dataset of children’s stories originally annotated with discrete emotion categories. We collect additional annotations for this data and map the categorical labels to the continuous valence and arousal space. For predicting the thus obtained emotionality signals, we fine-tune a DeBERTa model and improve upon this baseline via a weakly supervised learning approach. The best configuration achieves a Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) of .8221 for valence and .7125 for arousal on the test set, demonstrating the efficacy of our proposed approach. A detailed analysis shows the extent to which the results vary depending on factors such as the author, the individual story, or the section within the story. In addition, we uncover the weaknesses of our approach by investigating examples that prove to be difficult to predict.