47.0CLJun 2
Lingo_Research_Group at SemEval-2026 Task 9: Evaluating Prompt Variants for Polarization DetectionPritam Kadasi, Anuj Tiwari, Mayank Singh
Our submission presented in this paper is for SemEval-2026 Task 9: Multilingual Text Classification Challenge - Polarization Detection and it covers all three subtasks: (1) binary polarization detection, (2) polarization type classification and (3) polarization manifestation identification. We adopt a systematic approach of research on short designed prompts by considering twelve designed prompts that are different in terminology clarity, detail of the definition, guidance of reasoning and in-context examples use. The experiments are conducted using aya-101 and Gemma3-27B, with the latter chosen for the submission at the end of the development through performance considerations. Our system has an average macro level F1-score of 0.762 on Subtask 1, 0.587 on Subtask 2 and 0.444 on Subtask 3 with the average accuracy of 0.819, 0.678 and 0.498, respectively, on the official test set averaged among 22 languages, respectively. With cross-task and cross-lingual analysis, we demonstrate that prompt-based approaches can be used effectively to detect coarse grained polarization but encounter more and more difficulties as far as fine-grained and multi-label sociolinguistic classification is concerned.
CLOct 23, 2023
Unveiling the Multi-Annotation Process: Examining the Influence of Annotation Quantity and Instance Difficulty on Model PerformancePritam Kadasi, Mayank Singh
The NLP community has long advocated for the construction of multi-annotator datasets to better capture the nuances of language interpretation, subjectivity, and ambiguity. This paper conducts a retrospective study to show how performance scores can vary when a dataset expands from a single annotation per instance to multiple annotations. We propose a novel multi-annotator simulation process to generate datasets with varying annotation budgets. We show that similar datasets with the same annotation budget can lead to varying performance gains. Our findings challenge the popular belief that models trained on multi-annotation examples always lead to better performance than models trained on single or few-annotation examples.
53.5CLMay 1
When LLMs Stop Following Steps: A Diagnostic Study of Procedural Execution in Language ModelsSailesh Panda, Pritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal et al.
Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong performance on reasoning benchmarks, but final-answer accuracy alone does not show whether they faithfully execute the procedure specified in a prompt. We study this question through a controlled diagnostic benchmark for procedural execution, where models are given a step-wise arithmetic algorithm and two numeric inputs, and must return the final computed value. The benchmark uses simple arithmetic operations but increases complexity through algorithm length and look-back dependencies over intermediate variables. Across 14 models and 55 datasets, average first-answer accuracy drops from 61% on 5-step procedures to 20% on 95-step procedures. Generation-level analysis shows that failures often involve missing answers, premature answers, self-correction after an initial error, under-executed traces, and hallucinated extra steps. These findings suggest that apparent reasoning ability can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution.
CLDec 4, 2025
ADAPT: Learning Task Mixtures for Budget-Constrained Instruction TuningPritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, Mayank SIngh
We propose ADAPT, a meta-learning algorithm that \emph{learns} task sampling proportions under an explicit token budget for multi-task instruction tuning. Instead of fixing task weights by hand, \adapt{} maintains a continuous distribution over tasks and updates it via meta-gradients of a smooth worst-case validation objective, inducing an adaptive curriculum that allocates more tokens to useful tasks while avoiding collapse. We instantiate ADAPT on three $\sim$1B-parameter open-weight LLMs (Gemma-3-1B, LLaMA-3.2-1B, Qwen-0.6B), training on 20 Natural Instructions task types under budgets of $1\%$, $5\%$, and $10\%$ of the available supervised tokens, and compare against strong supervised fine-tuning baselines with uniform and size-proportional mixing. We conduct evaluations on 11 out-of-domain benchmarks spanning reasoning, reading comprehension, code generation, and instruction following, we find that ADAPT matches or slightly improves average downstream performance relative to the best static mixture, while using fewer effective training tokens and reallocating budget toward harder, benchmark-aligned tasks.
CLFeb 3
Task--Specificity Score: Measuring How Much Instructions Really Matter for SupervisionPritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, Mayank Singh
Instruction tuning is now the default way to train and adapt large language models, but many instruction--input--output pairs are only weakly specified: for a given input, the same output can remain plausible under several alternative instructions. This raises a simple question: \emph{does the instruction uniquely determine the target output?} We propose the \textbf{Task--Specificity Score (TSS)} to quantify how much an instruction matters for predicting its output, by contrasting the true instruction against plausible alternatives for the same input. We further introduce \textbf{TSS++}, which uses hard alternatives and a small quality term to mitigate easy-negative effects. Across three instruction datasets (\textsc{Alpaca}, \textsc{Dolly-15k}, \textsc{NI-20}) and three open LLMs (Gemma, Llama, Qwen), we show that selecting task-specific examples improves downstream performance under tight token budgets and complements quality-based filters such as perplexity and IFD.
CLMar 19, 2025
Model Hubs and Beyond: Analyzing Model Popularity, Performance, and DocumentationPritam Kadasi, Sriman Reddy Kondam, Srivathsa Vamsi Chaturvedula et al.
With the massive surge in ML models on platforms like Hugging Face, users often lose track and struggle to choose the best model for their downstream tasks, frequently relying on model popularity indicated by download counts, likes, or recency. We investigate whether this popularity aligns with actual model performance and how the comprehensiveness of model documentation correlates with both popularity and performance. In our study, we evaluated a comprehensive set of 500 Sentiment Analysis models on Hugging Face. This evaluation involved massive annotation efforts, with human annotators completing nearly 80,000 annotations, alongside extensive model training and evaluation. Our findings reveal that model popularity does not necessarily correlate with performance. Additionally, we identify critical inconsistencies in model card reporting: approximately 80% of the models analyzed lack detailed information about the model, training, and evaluation processes. Furthermore, about 88% of model authors overstate their models' performance in the model cards. Based on our findings, we provide a checklist of guidelines for users to choose good models for downstream tasks.
IRJun 5, 2020
Gandhipedia: A one-stop AI-enabled portal for browsing Gandhian literature, life-events and his social networkSayantan Adak, Atharva Vyas, Animesh Mukherjee et al.
We introduce an AI-enabled portal that presents an excellent visualization of Mahatma Gandhi's life events by constructing temporal and spatial social networks from the Gandhian literature. Applying an ensemble of methods drawn from NLTK, Polyglot and Spacy we extract the key persons and places that find mentions in Gandhi's written works. We visualize these entities and connections between them based on co-mentions within the same time frame as networks in an interactive web portal. The nodes in the network, when clicked, fire search queries about the entity and all the information about the entity presented in the corresponding book from which the network is constructed, are retrieved and presented back on the portal. Overall, this system can be used as a digital and user-friendly resource to study Gandhian literature.