From Quotes to Concepts: Axial Coding of Political Debates with Ensemble LMs

Authors
Publication date 2026
Host editors
  • Ricardo Campos
  • Adam Jatowt
  • Yanyan Lan
  • Mohammad Aliannejadi
  • Christine Bauer
  • Sean MacAvaney
  • Avishek Anand
  • Nan Bai
  • Masoud Mansoury
  • Zhaochun Ren
  • Suzan Verberne
Book title Advances in Information Retrieval
Book subtitle 48th European Conference on Information Retrieval, ECIR 2026, Delft, The Netherlands, March 29–April 2, 2026 : proceedings
ISBN
  • 9783032212993
ISBN (electronic)
  • 9783032213006
Series Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Event 48th European Conference on Information Retrieval, ECIR 2026
Volume | Issue number II
Pages (from-to) 139-154
Number of pages 16
Publisher Cham: Springer
Organisations
  • Interfacultary Research - Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC)
Abstract

Axial coding is a commonly used qualitative analysis method that enhances document understanding by organizing sentence-level open codes into broader categories. In this paper, we operationalize axial coding with large language models (LLMs). Extending an ensemble-based open coding approach with an LLM moderator, we add an axial coding step that groups open codes into higher-order categories, transforming raw debate transcripts into concise, hierarchical representations. We compare two strategies: (i) clustering embeddings of code-utterance pairs using density-based and partitioning algorithms followed by LLM labeling, and (ii) direct LLM-based grouping of codes and utterances into categories. We apply our method to Dutch parliamentary debates, converting lengthy transcripts into compact, hierarchically structured codes and categories. We evaluate our method using extrinsic metrics aligned with human-assigned topic labels (ROUGE-L, cosine, BERTScore), and intrinsic metrics describing code groups (coverage, brevity, coherence, novelty, JSD divergence). Our results reveal a trade-off: density-based clustering achieves high coverage and strong cluster alignment, while direct LLM grouping results in higher fine-grained alignment, but lower coverage (20%). Overall, clustering maximizes coverage and structural separation, whereas LLM grouping produces more concise, interpretable, and semantically aligned categories. To support future research, we publicly release the full dataset of utterances and codes, enabling reproducibility and comparative studies.

Document type Conference contribution
Language English
Published at
Other links
Downloads
978-3-032-21300-6_9 (Embargo up to 2026-09-25) (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back