Shashank Srivastava

Aarohi Srivastava, Abhinav Rastogi, Abhishek Rao et al. · allen-ai, amazon-science

Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 450 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.

Kerem Zaman, Leshem Choshen, Shashank Srivastava · ibm-research

Model fusion research aims to aggregate the knowledge of multiple individual models to enhance performance by combining their weights. In this work, we study the inverse problem: investigating whether model fusion can be used to reduce unwanted knowledge. We investigate the effects of model fusion in three scenarios: the learning of shortcuts, social biases, and memorization of training data in fine-tuned language models. Through experiments covering classification and generation tasks, our analysis highlights that shared knowledge among models is enhanced during model fusion, while unshared knowledge is usually forgotten. Based on this observation, we demonstrate the potential of model fusion as a debiasing tool and showcase its efficacy in addressing privacy concerns associated with language models.

Siddhant Jaydeep Mahajani, Shashank Srivastava, Alan F. Smeaton

Lexicon-based approaches to sentiment analysis of text are based on each word or lexical entry having a pre-defined weight indicating its sentiment polarity. These are usually manually assigned but the accuracy of these when compared against machine leaning based approaches to computing sentiment, are not known. It may be that there are lexical entries whose sentiment values cause a lexicon-based approach to give results which are very different to a machine learning approach. In this paper we compute sentiment for more than 150,000 English language texts drawn from 4 domains using the Hedonometer, a lexicon-based technique and Azure, a contemporary machine-learning based approach which is part of the Azure Cognitive Services family of APIs which is easy to use. We model differences in sentiment scores between approaches for documents in each domain using a regression and analyse the independent variables (Hedonometer lexical entries) as indicators of each word's importance and contribution to the score differences. Our findings are that the importance of a word depends on the domain and there are no standout lexical entries which systematically cause differences in sentiment scores.

Rakesh R Menon, Sayan Ghosh, Shashank Srivastava

Supervised learning has traditionally focused on inductive learning by observing labeled examples of a task. In contrast, humans have the ability to learn new concepts from language. Here, we explore training zero-shot classifiers for structured data purely from language. For this, we introduce CLUES, a benchmark for Classifier Learning Using natural language ExplanationS, consisting of a range of classification tasks over structured data along with natural language supervision in the form of explanations. CLUES consists of 36 real-world and 144 synthetic classification tasks. It contains crowdsourced explanations describing real-world tasks from multiple teachers and programmatically generated explanations for the synthetic tasks. To model the influence of explanations in classifying an example, we develop ExEnt, an entailment-based model that learns classifiers using explanations. ExEnt generalizes up to 18% better (relative) on novel tasks than a baseline that does not use explanations. We delineate key challenges for automated learning from explanations, addressing which can lead to progress on CLUES in the future. Code and datasets are available at: https://clues-benchmark.github.io.

Kangda Wei, Sayan Ghosh, Rakesh R. Menon et al.

Recent approaches have explored language-guided classifiers capable of classifying examples from novel tasks when provided with task-specific natural language explanations, instructions or prompts (Sanh et al., 2022; R. Menon et al., 2022). While these classifiers can generalize in zero-shot settings, their task performance often varies substantially between different language explanations in unpredictable ways (Lu et al., 2022; Gonen et al., 2022). Also, current approaches fail to leverage unlabeled examples that may be available in many scenarios. Here, we introduce TALC, a framework that uses data programming to adapt a language-guided classifier for a new task during inference when provided with explanations from multiple teachers and unlabeled test examples. Our results show that TALC consistently outperforms a competitive baseline from prior work by an impressive 9.3% (relative improvement). Further, we demonstrate the robustness of TALC to variations in the quality and quantity of provided explanations, highlighting its potential in scenarios where learning from multiple teachers or a crowd is involved. Our code is available at: https://github.com/WeiKangda/TALC.git.

Avinash Madasu, Shashank Srivastava

Large language models (LMs) have rapidly become a mainstay in Natural Language Processing. These models are known to acquire rich linguistic knowledge from training on large amounts of text. In this paper, we investigate if pre-training on text also confers these models with helpful `inductive biases' for non-linguistic reasoning. On a set of 19 diverse non-linguistic tasks involving quantitative computations, recognizing regular expressions and reasoning over strings. We find that pretrained models significantly outperform comparable non-pretrained neural models. This remains true also in experiments with training non-pretrained models with fewer parameters to account for model regularization effects. We further explore the effect of text domain on LMs by pretraining models from text from different domains and provenances. Our experiments surprisingly reveal that the positive effects of pre-training persist even when pretraining on multi-lingual text or computer code, and even for text generated from synthetic languages. Our findings suggest a hitherto unexplored deep connection between pre-training and inductive learning abilities of language models.

Sayan Ghosh, Rakesh R Menon, Shashank Srivastava

A hallmark of human intelligence is the ability to learn new concepts purely from language. Several recent approaches have explored training machine learning models via natural language supervision. However, these approaches fall short in leveraging linguistic quantifiers (such as 'always' or 'rarely') and mimicking humans in compositionally learning complex tasks. Here, we present LaSQuE, a method that can learn zero-shot classifiers from language explanations by using three new strategies - (1) modeling the semantics of linguistic quantifiers in explanations (including exploiting ordinal strength relationships, such as 'always' > 'likely'), (2) aggregating information from multiple explanations using an attention-based mechanism, and (3) model training via curriculum learning. With these strategies, LaSQuE outperforms prior work, showing an absolute gain of up to 7% in generalizing to unseen real-world classification tasks.

Graham Caron, Shashank Srivastava

Psychology research has long explored aspects of human personality such as extroversion, agreeableness and emotional stability. Categorizations like the `Big Five' personality traits are commonly used to assess and diagnose personality types. In this work, we explore the question of whether the perceived personality in language models is exhibited consistently in their language generation. For example, is a language model such as GPT2 likely to respond in a consistent way if asked to go out to a party? We also investigate whether such personality traits can be controlled. We show that when provided different types of contexts (such as personality descriptions, or answers to diagnostic questions about personality traits), language models such as BERT and GPT2 can consistently identify and reflect personality markers in those contexts. This behavior illustrates an ability to be manipulated in a highly predictable way, and frames them as tools for identifying personality traits and controlling personas in applications such as dialog systems. We also contribute a crowd-sourced data-set of personality descriptions of human subjects paired with their `Big Five' personality assessment data, and a data-set of personality descriptions collated from Reddit.

Tarik Can Ozden, Ozgur Kara, Oguzhan Akcin et al.

Current image immunization defense techniques against diffusion-based editing embed imperceptible noise in target images to disrupt editing models. However, these methods face scalability challenges, as they require time-consuming re-optimization for each image-taking hours for small batches. To address these challenges, we introduce DiffVax, a scalable, lightweight, and optimization-free framework for image immunization, specifically designed to prevent diffusion-based editing. Our approach enables effective generalization to unseen content, reducing computational costs and cutting immunization time from days to milliseconds-achieving a 250,000x speedup. This is achieved through a loss term that ensures the failure of editing attempts and the imperceptibility of the perturbations. Extensive qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate that our model is scalable, optimization-free, adaptable to various diffusion-based editing tools, robust against counter-attacks, and, for the first time, effectively protects video content from editing. Our code is provided in our project webpage.

Scott Merrill, Shashank Srivastava

Existing deception datasets label completed outputs as honest or deceptive, treating deception as a property of the final response rather than a function of the model's reasoning trace. This obscures a more fundamental question: when does a language model become committed to deception? We introduce counterfactual localization: for each sentence prefix in a reasoning trace, we fix the prefix, resample continuations, and estimate the probability of a deceptive outcome. To scale this, we construct five environments (spanning strategic bluffing, maze guidance, financial advice, used-car sales, and offer negotiation) in which deception is never prompted but emerges from strategic incentives and labels follow mechanically from environment state rather than subjective human judgment. The resulting corpus localizes $\sim$1.46M sentences across four reasoning models, drawn from over 94.1M sampled continuations, 91.5B generated tokens, and over 100K scenarios. Sentence-level human evaluation confirms that detected commitment points correspond to interpretable shifts in decision state. Using this resource, we show that lexical cues for commitment prediction transfer poorly across environments, whereas attention-based transition features generalize out of distribution, suggesting that deceptive commitment is reflected in reusable changes in reasoning dynamics rather than surface form. We further identify compact attention-head sets (under 10% of heads) that, selected on one environment, causally suppress deceptive commitment across held-out environments. We release the corpus as a substrate for studying deception, and more broadly commitment, in language-model reasoning.

Yiyuan Li, Rakesh R. Menon, Sayan Ghosh et al.

Generalized quantifiers (e.g., few, most) are used to indicate the proportions predicates are satisfied (for example, some apples are red). One way to interpret quantifier semantics is to explicitly bind these satisfactions with percentage scopes (e.g., 30%-40% of apples are red). This approach can be helpful for tasks like logic formalization and surface-form quantitative reasoning (Gordon and Schubert, 2010; Roy et al., 2015). However, it remains unclear if recent foundation models possess this ability, as they lack direct training signals. To explore this, we introduce QuRe, a crowd-sourced dataset of human-annotated generalized quantifiers in Wikipedia sentences featuring percentage-equipped predicates. We explore quantifier comprehension in language models using PRESQUE, a framework that combines natural language inference and the Rational Speech Acts framework. Experimental results on the HVD dataset and QuRe illustrate that PRESQUE, employing pragmatic reasoning, performs 20% better than a literal reasoning baseline when predicting quantifier percentage scopes, with no additional training required.

Kerem Zaman, Shashank Srivastava

Recent work, using the Biasing Features metric, labels a CoT as unfaithful if it omits a prompt-injected hint that affected the prediction. We argue this metric confuses unfaithfulness with incompleteness, the lossy compression needed to turn distributed transformer computation into a linear natural language narrative. On multi-hop reasoning tasks with Llama-3 and Gemma-3, many CoTs flagged as unfaithful by Biasing Features are judged faithful by other metrics, exceeding 50% in some models. With a new faithful@k metric, we show that larger inference-time token budgets greatly increase hint verbalization (up to 90% in some settings), suggesting much apparent unfaithfulness is due to tight token limits. Using Causal Mediation Analysis, we further show that even non-verbalized hints can causally mediate prediction changes through the CoT. We therefore caution against relying solely on hint-based evaluations and advocate a broader interpretability toolkit, including causal mediation and corruption-based metrics.

Derek Tam, Rakesh R Menon, Mohit Bansal et al.

Recently, pre-trained language models (LMs) have achieved strong performance when fine-tuned on difficult benchmarks like SuperGLUE. However, performance can suffer when there are very few labeled examples available for fine-tuning. Pattern Exploiting Training (PET) is a recent approach that leverages patterns for few-shot learning. However, PET uses task-specific unlabeled data. In this paper, we focus on few-shot learning without any unlabeled data and introduce ADAPET, which modifies PET's objective to provide denser supervision during fine-tuning. As a result, ADAPET outperforms PET on SuperGLUE without any task-specific unlabeled data. Our code can be found at https://github.com/rrmenon10/ADAPET.

Swarnadeep Saha, Sayan Ghosh, Shashank Srivastava et al.

Recent work by Clark et al. (2020) shows that transformers can act as 'soft theorem provers' by answering questions over explicitly provided knowledge in natural language. In our work, we take a step closer to emulating formal theorem provers, by proposing PROVER, an interpretable transformer-based model that jointly answers binary questions over rule-bases and generates the corresponding proofs. Our model learns to predict nodes and edges corresponding to proof graphs in an efficient constrained training paradigm. During inference, a valid proof, satisfying a set of global constraints is generated. We conduct experiments on synthetic, hand-authored, and human-paraphrased rule-bases to show promising results for QA and proof generation, with strong generalization performance. First, PROVER generates proofs with an accuracy of 87%, while retaining or improving performance on the QA task, compared to RuleTakers (up to 6% improvement on zero-shot evaluation). Second, when trained on questions requiring lower depths of reasoning, it generalizes significantly better to higher depths (up to 15% improvement). Third, PROVER obtains near perfect QA accuracy of 98% using only 40% of the training data. However, generating proofs for questions requiring higher depths of reasoning becomes challenging, and the accuracy drops to 65% for 'depth 5', indicating significant scope for future work. Our code and models are publicly available at https://github.com/swarnaHub/PRover

Anvesh Rao Vijjini, Rakesh R. Menon, Jiayi Fu et al.

While much research has explored enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in the last few years, there is a gap in understanding the alignment of these models with social values and norms. We introduce the task of judging social acceptance. Social acceptance requires models to judge and rationalize the acceptability of people's actions in social situations. For example, is it socially acceptable for a neighbor to ask others in the community to keep their pets indoors at night? We find that LLMs' understanding of social acceptance is often misaligned with human consensus. To alleviate this, we introduce SocialGaze, a multi-step prompting framework, in which a language model verbalizes a social situation from multiple perspectives before forming a judgment. Our experiments demonstrate that the SocialGaze approach improves the alignment with human judgments by up to 11 F1 points with the GPT-3.5 model. We also identify biases and correlations in LLMs in assigning blame that is related to features such as the gender (males are significantly more likely to be judged unfairly) and age (LLMs are more aligned with humans for older narrators).

Kerem Zaman, Shashank Srivastava

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer natural language explanations as an alternative to feature attribution methods for model interpretability. However, despite their plausibility, they may not reflect the model's true reasoning faithfully, which is crucial for understanding the model's true decision-making processes. Although several faithfulness metrics have been proposed, they are often evaluated in isolation, making direct, principled comparisons between them difficult. Here, we present Causal Diagnosticity, a framework that serves as a common testbed to evaluate faithfulness metrics for natural language explanations. Our framework employs the concept of diagnosticity, and uses model-editing methods to generate faithful-unfaithful explanation pairs. Our benchmark includes four tasks: fact-checking, analogy, object counting, and multi-hop reasoning. We evaluate prominent faithfulness metrics, including post-hoc explanation and chain-of-thought-based methods. We find that diagnostic performance varies across tasks and models, with Filler Tokens performing best overall. Additionally, continuous metrics are generally more diagnostic than binary ones but can be sensitive to noise and model choice. Our results highlight the need for more robust faithfulness metrics.

Rakesh R. Menon, Shashank Srivastava

Despite their high predictive accuracies, current machine learning systems often exhibit systematic biases stemming from annotation artifacts or insufficient support for certain classes in the dataset. Recent work proposes automatic methods for identifying and explaining systematic biases using keywords. We introduce DISCERN, a framework for interpreting systematic biases in text classifiers using language explanations. DISCERN iteratively generates precise natural language descriptions of systematic errors by employing an interactive loop between two large language models. Finally, we use the descriptions to improve classifiers by augmenting classifier training sets with synthetically generated instances or annotated examples via active learning. On three text-classification datasets, we demonstrate that language explanations from our framework induce consistent performance improvements that go beyond what is achievable with exemplars of systematic bias. Finally, in human evaluations, we show that users can interpret systematic biases more effectively (by over 25% relative) and efficiently when described through language explanations as opposed to cluster exemplars.

Anneliese Brei, Katharine Henry, Abhisheik Sharma et al.

Often when we interact with a first-person account of events, we consider whether or not the narrator, the primary speaker of the text, is reliable. In this paper, we propose using computational methods to identify unreliable narrators, i.e. those who unintentionally misrepresent information. Borrowing literary theory from narratology to define different types of unreliable narrators based on a variety of textual phenomena, we present TUNa, a human-annotated dataset of narratives from multiple domains, including blog posts, subreddit posts, hotel reviews, and works of literature. We define classification tasks for intra-narrational, inter-narrational, and inter-textual unreliabilities and analyze the performance of popular open-weight and proprietary LLMs for each. We propose learning from literature to perform unreliable narrator classification on real-world text data. To this end, we experiment with few-shot, fine-tuning, and curriculum learning settings. Our results show that this task is very challenging, and there is potential for using LLMs to identify unreliable narrators. We release our expert-annotated dataset and code and invite future research in this area.

Aum Kendapadi, Kerem Zaman, Rakesh R. Menon et al.

Large language models (LLMs) excel at answering questions but remain passive learners-absorbing static data without the ability to question and refine knowledge. This paper explores how LLMs can transition to interactive, question-driven learning through student-teacher dialogues. We introduce INTERACT (INTERactive learning for Adaptive Concept Transfer), a framework in which a "student" LLM engages a "teacher" LLM through iterative inquiries to acquire knowledge across 1,347 contexts, including song lyrics, news articles, movie plots, academic papers, and images. Our experiments show that across a wide range of scenarios and LLM architectures, interactive learning consistently enhances performance, achieving up to a 25% improvement, with 'cold-start' student models matching static learning baselines in as few as five dialogue turns. Interactive setups can also mitigate the disadvantages of weaker teachers, showcasing the robustness of question-driven learning.

Anika Sharma, Tianyi Niu, Emma Wrenn et al.

The phenomenon of sound symbolism, the non-arbitrary mapping between word sounds and meanings, has long been demonstrated through anecdotal experiments like Bouba Kiki, but rarely tested at scale. We present the first computational cross-linguistic analysis of sound symbolism in the semantic domain of size. We compile a typologically broad dataset of 810 adjectives (27 languages, 30 words each), each phonemically transcribed and validated with native-speaker audio. Using interpretable classifiers over bag-of-segment features, we find that phonological form predicts size semantics above chance even across unrelated languages, with both vowels and consonants contributing. To probe universality beyond genealogy, we train an adversarial scrubber that suppresses language identity while preserving size signal (also at family granularity). Language prediction averaged across languages and settings falls below chance while size prediction remains significantly above chance, indicating cross-family sound-symbolic bias. We release data, code, and diagnostic tools for future large-scale studies of iconicity.

Rajeev Bhatt Ambati, Tianyi Niu, Aashu Singh et al.

Large language Models (LLMs) are usually used to answer questions, but many high-stakes applications (e.g., tutoring, clinical support) require the complementary skill of asking questions: detecting missing information, requesting clarifications, and using them to solve tasks. We study this skill in reasoning-heavy domains where progress depends on inquiry rather than factual recall. We define an interactive protocol where a student model engages a stronger teacher under a small turn budget. After each teacher reply, we evaluate the student on the original task with Pass@k. We propose Outcome-Driven Question optimization Strategy (ODQS ), a training framework that learns a questioning policy from downstream task outcomes. At each turn, we sample multiple candidate questions; query the teacher with each, then score the student's resulting performance. Using these scores, we train the student via supervised fine-tuning followed by Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), without any human labels. On GSM8K, HumanEval, and OpenCoder, ODQS produces large gains over interactive baselines, boosting Pass@5 by up to 54.7% (absolute) on math and 22.9% (absolute) on coding, and matching baseline performance in three fewer turns. Thus, question asking can be explicitly trained from task outcomes, improving both accuracy and efficiency in interactive reasoning.

Scott Merrill, Shashank Srivastava

Large language models offer opportunities to simulate multi-party deliberation, but realistic modeling remains limited by a lack of speaker-attributed data. Transcripts produced via automatic speech recognition (ASR) assign anonymous speaker labels (e.g., Speaker_1), preventing models from capturing consistent human behavior. This work introduces a reproducible pipeline to transform public Zoom recordings into speaker-attributed transcripts with metadata like persona profiles and pragmatic action tags (e.g., [propose_motion]). We release three local government deliberation datasets: Appellate Court hearings, School Board meetings, and Municipal Council sessions. Fine-tuning LLMs to model specific participants using this "action-aware" data produces a 67% reduction in perplexity and nearly doubles classifier-based performance metrics for speaker fidelity and realism. Turing-style human evaluations show our simulations are often indistinguishable from real deliberations, providing a practical and scalable method for complex realistic civic simulations.

Rakesh R. Menon, Kerem Zaman, Shashank Srivastava

Understanding the internal reasoning behind the predictions of machine learning systems is increasingly vital, given their rising adoption and acceptance. While previous approaches, such as LIME, generate algorithmic explanations by attributing importance to input features for individual examples, recent research indicates that practitioners prefer examining language explanations that explain sub-groups of examples. In this paper, we introduce MaNtLE, a model-agnostic natural language explainer that analyzes multiple classifier predictions and generates faithful natural language explanations of classifier rationale for structured classification tasks. MaNtLE uses multi-task training on thousands of synthetic classification tasks to generate faithful explanations. Simulated user studies indicate that, on average, MaNtLE-generated explanations are at least 11% more faithful compared to LIME and Anchors explanations across three tasks. Human evaluations demonstrate that users can better predict model behavior using explanations from MaNtLE compared to other techniques

Bingsheng Yao, Ishan Jindal, Lucian Popa et al.

Real-world domain experts (e.g., doctors) rarely annotate only a decision label in their day-to-day workflow without providing explanations. Yet, existing low-resource learning techniques, such as Active Learning (AL), that aim to support human annotators mostly focus on the label while neglecting the natural language explanation of a data point. This work proposes a novel AL architecture to support experts' real-world need for label and explanation annotations in low-resource scenarios. Our AL architecture leverages an explanation-generation model to produce explanations guided by human explanations, a prediction model that utilizes generated explanations toward prediction faithfully, and a novel data diversity-based AL sampling strategy that benefits from the explanation annotations. Automated and human evaluations demonstrate the effectiveness of incorporating explanations into AL sampling and the improved human annotation efficiency and trustworthiness with our AL architecture. Additional ablation studies illustrate the potential of our AL architecture for transfer learning, generalizability, and integration with large language models (LLMs). While LLMs exhibit exceptional explanation-generation capabilities for relatively simple tasks, their effectiveness in complex real-world tasks warrants further in-depth study.

Sayan Ghosh, Shashank Srivastava

Mapping natural language instructions to programs that computers can process is a fundamental challenge. Existing approaches focus on likelihood-based training or using reinforcement learning to fine-tune models based on a single reward. In this paper, we pose program generation from language as Inverse Reinforcement Learning. We introduce several interpretable reward components and jointly learn (1) a reward function that linearly combines them, and (2) a policy for program generation. Fine-tuning with our approach achieves significantly better performance than competitive methods using Reinforcement Learning (RL). On the VirtualHome framework, we get improvements of up to 9.0% on the Longest Common Subsequence metric and 14.7% on recall-based metrics over previous work on this framework (Puig et al., 2018). The approach is data-efficient, showing larger gains in performance in the low-data regime. Generated programs are also preferred by human evaluators over an RL-based approach, and rated higher on relevance, completeness, and human-likeness.

Somnath Basu Roy Chowdhury, Sayan Ghosh, Yiyuan Li et al.

Contextual representations learned by language models can often encode undesirable attributes, like demographic associations of the users, while being trained for an unrelated target task. We aim to scrub such undesirable attributes and learn fair representations while maintaining performance on the target task. In this paper, we present an adversarial learning framework "Adversarial Scrubber" (ADS), to debias contextual representations. We perform theoretical analysis to show that our framework converges without leaking demographic information under certain conditions. We extend previous evaluation techniques by evaluating debiasing performance using Minimum Description Length (MDL) probing. Experimental evaluations on 8 datasets show that ADS generates representations with minimal information about demographic attributes while being maximally informative about the target task.

Sayan Ghosh, Shashank Srivastava

While large language models have shown exciting progress on several NLP benchmarks, evaluating their ability for complex analogical reasoning remains under-explored. Here, we introduce a high-quality crowdsourced dataset of narratives for employing proverbs in context as a benchmark for abstract language understanding. The dataset provides fine-grained annotation of aligned spans between proverbs and narratives, and contains minimal lexical overlaps between narratives and proverbs, ensuring that models need to go beyond surface-level reasoning to succeed. We explore three tasks: (1) proverb recommendation and alignment prediction, (2) narrative generation for a given proverb and topic, and (3) identifying narratives with similar motifs. Our experiments show that neural language models struggle on these tasks compared to humans, and these tasks pose multiple learning challenges.

Shashank Srivastava, Snigdha Chaturvedi, Tom Mitchell

Characterizing relationships between people is fundamental for the understanding of narratives. In this work, we address the problem of inferring the polarity of relationships between people in narrative summaries. We formulate the problem as a joint structured prediction for each narrative, and present a model that combines evidence from linguistic and semantic features, as well as features based on the structure of the social community in the text. We also provide a clustering-based approach that can exploit regularities in narrative types. e.g., learn an affinity for love-triangles in romantic stories. On a dataset of movie summaries from Wikipedia, our structured models provide more than a 30% error-reduction over a competitive baseline that considers pairs of characters in isolation.

Snigdha Chaturvedi, Shashank Srivastava, Hal Daume et al.

Studying characters plays a vital role in computationally representing and interpreting narratives. Unlike previous work, which has focused on inferring character roles, we focus on the problem of modeling their relationships. Rather than assuming a fixed relationship for a character pair, we hypothesize that relationships are dynamic and temporally evolve with the progress of the narrative, and formulate the problem of relationship modeling as a structured prediction problem. We propose a semi-supervised framework to learn relationship sequences from fully as well as partially labeled data. We present a Markovian model capable of accumulating historical beliefs about the relationship and status changes. We use a set of rich linguistic and semantically motivated features that incorporate world knowledge to investigate the textual content of narrative. We empirically demonstrate that such a framework outperforms competitive baselines.