Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Samira Loveymi

Publications and source records attributed to Samira Loveymi.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

A Tutorial on Prompt Engineering: From Messy Thoughts to AI Workflows

This paper treats prompt engineering as a discipline for turning informal human intent into structured AI work specifications. It develops the practice as a sequence of reusable design moves: define the work, construct only the context the answer depends on, choose a role, or a moderated panel of roles, as an attention lens, and state affirmative quality targets, reserving prohibitions for hard boundaries. To keep prompts lean, it adapts two classical principles, Occam's razor and Chekhov's gun, so that every instruction earns its place. For consequential tasks, it adds structured critique through steelmanning and premortems, followed by verification and, where tools or multi-step actions are involved, agentic operating loops with explicit boundaries and escalation. Aimed at a general readership, this tutorial is not a benchmarking study; it offers a practical, technically grounded path from casual prompting to disciplined AI workflow design, illustrated by a worked example that carries one task from a weak prompt to a strong specification. The framework is presented as principles and checklists that remain useful as models and tools change. The strongest prompt is rarely the longest prompt; it is the one that makes desired behaviour, required sources and checks, and success criteria unmistakable.

cs.CL↗

Can We Trust LLMs for Mental Health Screening? Consistency, ASR Robustness, and Evidence Faithfulness

LLMs can estimate Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores from speech in a zero-shot manner, but clinical deployment requires reliability across three dimensions: intra-model consistency, ASR robustness, and evidence faithfulness. We evaluate three LLMs (Phi-4, Gemma-2-9B, and Llama-3.1-8B) on 111 English-speaking participants using ground-truth transcripts and three Whisper ASR variants (Large, Medium, Small), with three independent runs per model-condition pair. We find that (i) Phi-4 and Gemma-2-9B achieve excellent intra-model consistency (ICC > 0.89) with minimal degradation under ASR; (ii) Llama-3.1-8B shows ASR-fragile consistency, with ICC dropping from 0.82 to 0.36 at 10% WER; (iii) predictive validity is largely preserved under ASR for robust models; and (iv) keyword groundedness exceeds 93% for Phi-4 and Gemma-2-9B but falls to 77-81% for Llama-3.1-8B. Inter-model keyword agreement is far lower than score-level agreement, revealing a score-evidence dissociation with implications for clinical interpretability.

cs.CL↗