Nona Ghazizadeh

Alireza S. Ziabari, Nona Ghazizadeh, Zhivar Sourati et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive reasoning abilities, yet their reliance on structured step-by-step processing reveals a critical limitation. In contrast, human cognition fluidly adapts between intuitive, heuristic (System 1) and analytical, deliberative (System 2) reasoning depending on the context. This difference between human cognitive flexibility and LLMs' reliance on a single reasoning style raises a critical question: while human fast heuristic reasoning evolved for its efficiency and adaptability, is a uniform reasoning approach truly optimal for LLMs, or does its inflexibility make them brittle and unreliable when faced with tasks demanding more agile, intuitive responses? To answer these questions, we explicitly align LLMs to these reasoning styles by curating a dataset with valid System 1 and System 2 answers, and evaluate their performance across reasoning benchmarks. Our results reveal an accuracy-efficiency trade-off: System 2-aligned models excel in arithmetic and symbolic reasoning, while System 1-aligned models perform better in commonsense reasoning tasks. To analyze the reasoning spectrum, we interpolated between the two extremes by varying the proportion of alignment data, which resulted in a monotonic change in accuracy. A mechanistic analysis of model responses shows that System 1 models employ more definitive outputs, whereas System 2 models demonstrate greater uncertainty. Building on these findings, we further combine System 1- and System 2-aligned models based on the entropy of their generations, without additional training, and obtain a dynamic model that outperforms across nearly all benchmarks. This work challenges the assumption that step-by-step reasoning is always optimal and highlights the need for adapting reasoning strategies based on task demands.

Mohammad Mahdi Abootorabi, Nona Ghazizadeh, Seyed Arshan Dalili et al.

In this study, we introduce a solution to the SemEval 2024 Task 10 on subtask 1, dedicated to Emotion Recognition in Conversation (ERC) in code-mixed Hindi-English conversations. ERC in code-mixed conversations presents unique challenges, as existing models are typically trained on monolingual datasets and may not perform well on code-mixed data. To address this, we propose a series of models that incorporate both the previous and future context of the current utterance, as well as the sequential information of the conversation. To facilitate the processing of code-mixed data, we developed a Hinglish-to-English translation pipeline to translate the code-mixed conversations into English. We designed four different base models, each utilizing powerful pre-trained encoders to extract features from the input but with varying architectures. By ensembling all of these models, we developed a final model that outperforms all other baselines.

Alireza Ghahramani Kure, Mahshid Dehghani, Mohammad Mahdi Abootorabi et al.

The SemEval-2024 Task 3 presents two subtasks focusing on emotion-cause pair extraction within conversational contexts. Subtask 1 revolves around the extraction of textual emotion-cause pairs, where causes are defined and annotated as textual spans within the conversation. Conversely, Subtask 2 extends the analysis to encompass multimodal cues, including language, audio, and vision, acknowledging instances where causes may not be exclusively represented in the textual data. Our proposed model for emotion-cause analysis is meticulously structured into three core segments: (i) embedding extraction, (ii) cause-pair extraction & emotion classification, and (iii) cause extraction using QA after finding pairs. Leveraging state-of-the-art techniques and fine-tuning on task-specific datasets, our model effectively unravels the intricate web of conversational dynamics and extracts subtle cues signifying causality in emotional expressions. Our team, AIMA, demonstrated strong performance in the SemEval-2024 Task 3 competition. We ranked as the 10th in subtask 1 and the 6th in subtask 2 out of 23 teams.