Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies
← Back to explorer

Quantifying the Affective Gap: A Zero-Shot Evaluation of LLMs on Fine-Grained Emotion Taxonomies

Lawrence Obiuwevwi, Krzysztof J. Rechowicz, Jessica M. Johnson, Vikas Ashok, Sachin Shetty, Sampath Jayarathna · Jul 1, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Moderate trust

Use this for comparison and orientation, not as your only source.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Moderate

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI. This paper presents a rigorous, unified zero-shot evaluation of three leading commercial large language models: Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6), ChatGPT (GPT-5.4), and Gemini (gemini-2.5-flash). The models were queried through their respective production APIs as of April 2026 on a fine-grained 13-class emotion classification task. Using a stratified 1,000-sentence sample from the boltuix/emotions dataset, which comprises 131,306 sentences across 13 categories, a single uniform prompt with no exemplars was applied identically across all models. Gemini achieves the highest accuracy (39.9%) and macro-F1 score (0.363), followed by GPT-5.4 (38.8%, macro-F1 = 0.291) and Claude (38.0%, macro-F1 = 0.159). All models excel on sarcasm and desire while consistently failing on love, confusion, and shame. McNemar tests reveal no statistically significant pairwise differences (p > 0.10), suggesting convergence at a shared zero-shot ceiling. Claude's markedly lower macro-F1 score exposes a class-imbalance prediction bias. These findings highlight the current limitations of frontier AI systems in zero-shot fine-grained emotion classification.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper has useful evaluation signal, but protocol completeness is partial; pair it with related papers before deciding implementation strategy.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

No major weakness surfaced.

Trust level

Moderate

Usefulness score

65/100 • Medium

Useful as a secondary reference; validate protocol details against neighboring papers.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Moderate-confidence candidate

Extraction confidence 70%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

strong

Pairwise Preference

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI."

Evaluation Modes

strong

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI."

Reported Metrics

strong

Accuracy, F1, F1 macro

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Gemini achieves the highest accuracy (39.9%) and macro-F1 score (0.363), followed by GPT-5.4 (38.8%, macro-F1 = 0.291) and Claude (38.0%, macro-F1 = 0.159)."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Pairwise Preference
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Unit of annotation: Pairwise
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Moderate
  • Use this page as: Secondary protocol comparison source

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

accuracyf1f1 macro

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI.
  • This paper presents a rigorous, unified zero-shot evaluation of three leading commercial large language models: Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6), ChatGPT (GPT-5.4), and Gemini (gemini-2.5-flash).
  • The models were queried through their respective production APIs as of April 2026 on a fine-grained 13-class emotion classification task.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI.
  • This paper presents a rigorous, unified zero-shot evaluation of three leading commercial large language models: Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6), ChatGPT (GPT-5.4), and Gemini (gemini-2.5-flash).
  • Gemini achieves the highest accuracy (39.9%) and macro-F1 score (0.363), followed by GPT-5.4 (38.8%, macro-F1 = 0.291) and Claude (38.0%, macro-F1 = 0.159).

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI.
  • This paper presents a rigorous, unified zero-shot evaluation of three leading commercial large language models: Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6), ChatGPT (GPT-5.4), and Gemini (gemini-2.5-flash).

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Pairwise Preference

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy, f1, f1 macro

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.