arXiv:2606.28823cs.CL2026-06

用大模型自动标注实体匹配数据,省时省力还高效

Labeling Training Data for Entity Matching Using Large Language Models

论文配图:Labeling Training Data for Entity Matching Using Large Language Models
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 用大模型当老师,给小模型生成训练标签
  • 自动生成数据集效果接近人工标注,F1差距小于2点
  • 相比手动标注节省470小时,推理速度提升500倍

近期的大语言模型(LLMs)在无需任务特定训练数据的情况下即可实现强大的实体匹配性能。然而,将其应用于大量候选对时仍存在推理速度慢、成本高的问题。相比之下,传统机器学习方法或小型语言模型(如RoBERTa)虽推理速度快,但需依赖任务特定的训练数据。本文研究是否可通过知识蒸馏流程避免这一需求:由大模型作为教师,为候选对生成标签,再用于训练更小的学生模型。我们从配对选择策略、教师模型、标签后处理方法和学生模型四个维度评估该流程。在Abt-Buy、Walmart-Amazon、WDC Products、DBLP-ACM和DBLP-Scholar五个基准上进行测试,比较学生模型使用机器标注数据与标准训练集训练的效果。结果表明,使用机器标注数据训练的学生模型性能与基准训练集相当,双方差异均低于2个F1点。使用GPT-5.2为所有五个基准标注训练集,成本为28.31至40.88美元,而人工标注预计需470小时。推理阶段,Ditto模型比直接使用大模型快41.5至534倍。这表明,结合合适的配对选择策略,当前大模型可显著减少甚至消除实体匹配任务中特定场景训练数据的人工标注负担。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Recent large language models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on entity matching without requiring task-specific training data. However, applying these models to large sets of candidate pairs remains slow and costly. In contrast, entity matchers using traditional machine learning methods or small language models (SLMs), such as RoBERTa, offer much faster inference but require task-specific training data. This paper investigates whether the need to provide task-specific training data can be avoided by using knowledge-distillation workflows, in which an LLM serves as a teacher model to label training pairs that are subsequently used to train a smaller student model. We investigate knowledge distillation for entity matching along the following dimensions: pair-selection strategy, teacher model, label post-processing method, and student model. We evaluate the workflows using the Abt-Buy, Walmart-Amazon, WDC Products, DBLP-ACM, and DBLP-Scholar benchmarks, and compare the performance of student models trained with machine-labeled data to the performance of the same models trained using the benchmark training sets. Our experiments show that student models trained using the machine-labeled sets perform approximately on par with models trained on the benchmark training sets, with the remaining differences in both directions staying below two F1 points. Using GPT-5.2 to label the training sets for all five benchmarks costs US\$28.31 to US\$40.88, whereas manually labeling the same training sets is estimated to require 470 hours of work. At inference time, Ditto is 41.5 to 534 times faster than directly using an LLM to perform the matching tasks. These results indicate that current LLMs, when combined with a suitable pair-selection method, can substantially reduce or even eliminate the manual effort required to label use case-specific training data for entity matching.

实体匹配大模型知识蒸馏自动标注

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。