ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Do language families matter? Evaluating LLMs for sentiment analysis through a hierarchical cross-lingual lens.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social media sentiment analysis has become one of the most significant instruments for understanding the opinion of the population in the spheres of healthcare, politics, and education. Yet, large language models (LLMs) remain unevenly distributed in their linguistic coverage, failing to adequately serve a large portion of the world's languages. This study evaluates five state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4o, Gemini 2.0 Flash, DeepSeek-V3, Mistral Large, and Claude 3.7 Sonnet on three-class sentiment classification across 36 datasets spanning 36 languages, with emphasis on low- and medium-resource settings, using zero-shot and few-shot prompting without task-specific fine-tuning. In addition to the traditional measures of performance per language, the study presents a hierarchical analysis of languages based on a genealogical tree of Indo-European, Afro-Asiatic, Niger-Congo, Turkic, Austronesian, and English Creole language families, so that it is possible to identify the systematic patterns of performance superiority and inferiority among the language families. The findings show that few-shot prompting improves the results of a vast majority of languages, with several models approaching or surpassing the performance of the state-of-the-art benchmark of task-specific models. The GPT-4o and Claude achieved the highest performance in the high-resource and medium-resource settings, and Gemini is a competent trade-off that allows balancing the performance and the computational cost. Although it has lower zero-shot performance, Mistral benefits the most from few-shot prompting and becomes highly competitive in the few-shot setting. Despite these developments, the level of performance on low-resource languages, such as Oromo, Xitsonga, Azerbaijani, and Twi, remains significantly lower, underscoring that progress in multilingual LLMs requires moving beyond English-centric evaluation toward genuinely representative and globally inclusive benchmarks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.