Beyond the Star Rating: A Scalable Framework for Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis Using LLMs and Text Classification

Vishal Patil, Shree Vaishnavi Bacha, Revanth Yamani, Yidan Sun, Mayank Kejriwal · Feb 24, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

Data freshness

Extraction: Fresh

Check recency before relying on this page for active eval decisions. Use stale pages as context and verify against current hub results.

Metadata refreshed

Feb 24, 2026, 4:45 PM

Stale

Extraction refreshed

Apr 13, 2026, 6:42 AM

Fresh

Extraction source

Persisted extraction

Confidence 0.15

Abstract

Customer-provided reviews have become an important source of information for business owners and other customers alike. However, effectively analyzing millions of unstructured reviews remains challenging. While large language models (LLMs) show promise for natural language understanding, their application to large-scale review analysis has been limited by computational costs and scalability concerns. This study proposes a hybrid approach that uses LLMs for aspect identification while employing classic machine-learning methods for sentiment classification at scale. Using ChatGPT to analyze sampled restaurant reviews, we identified key aspects of dining experiences and developed sentiment classifiers using human-labeled reviews, which we subsequently applied to 4.7 million reviews collected over 17 years from a major online platform. Regression analysis reveals that our machine-labeled aspects significantly explain variance in overall restaurant ratings across different aspects of dining experiences, cuisines, and geographical regions. Our findings demonstrate that combining LLMs with traditional machine learning approaches can effectively automate aspect-based sentiment analysis of large-scale customer feedback, suggesting a practical framework for both researchers and practitioners in the hospitality industry and potentially, other service sectors.

Low-signal caution for protocol decisions

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.
Extraction confidence is 0.15 (below strong-reference threshold).
No explicit evaluation mode was extracted from available metadata.
No benchmark/dataset or metric anchors were extracted.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.

Trust level

Low

Eval-Fit Score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence: Low

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

Field Provenance & Confidence

Each key protocol field shows extraction state, confidence band, and data source so you can decide whether to trust it directly or validate from full text.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.