English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This study evaluates ChatGPT's performance in annotating vaccine-relatedArabic tweets by comparing its annotations with human annotations. A dataset of2,100 tweets representing various factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy wasexamined. Two domain experts annotated the data, with a third resolvingconflicts. ChatGPT was then employed to annotate the same dataset usingspecific prompts for each factor. The ChatGPT annotations were evaluatedthrough zero-shot, one-shot, and few-shot learning tests, with an averageaccuracy of 82.14%, 83.85%, and 85.57%, respectively. Precision averaged around86%, minimizing false positives. The average recall and F1-score ranged from0.74 to 0.80 and 0.65 to 0.93, respectively. AUC for zero-shot, one-shot, andfew-shot learning was 0.79, 0.80, and 0.83. In cases of ambiguity, both humanannotators and ChatGPT faced challenges. These findings suggest that ChatGPTholds promise as a tool for annotating vaccine-related tweets.

Potentials of ChatGPT for Annotating Vaccine Related Tweets