Ahmad Dawar Hakimi

CL
h-index13
5papers
140citations
Novelty48%
AI Score53

5 Papers

CLNov 4, 2023
Citance-Contextualized Summarization of Scientific Papers

Shahbaz Syed, Ahmad Dawar Hakimi, Khalid Al-Khatib et al.

Current approaches to automatic summarization of scientific papers generate informative summaries in the form of abstracts. However, abstracts are not intended to show the relationship between a paper and the references cited in it. We propose a new contextualized summarization approach that can generate an informative summary conditioned on a given sentence containing the citation of a reference (a so-called "citance"). This summary outlines the content of the cited paper relevant to the citation location. Thus, our approach extracts and models the citances of a paper, retrieves relevant passages from cited papers, and generates abstractive summaries tailored to each citance. We evaluate our approach using $\textbf{Webis-Context-SciSumm-2023}$, a new dataset containing 540K~computer science papers and 4.6M~citances therein.

41.5CLApr 15
Do We Still Need Humans in the Loop? Comparing Human and LLM Annotation in Active Learning for Hostility Detection

Ahmad Dawar Hakimi, Lea Hirlimann, Isabelle Augenstein et al.

Instruction-tuned LLMs can annotate thousands of instances from a short prompt at negligible cost. This raises two questions for active learning (AL): can LLM labels replace human labels within the AL loop, and does AL remain necessary when entire corpora can be labelled at once? We investigate both questions on a new dataset of 277,902 German political TikTok comments (25,974 LLM-labelled, 5,000 human-annotated), comparing seven annotation strategies across four encoders to detect anti-immigrant hostility. A classifier trained on 25,974 GPT-5.2 labels (\$43) achieves comparable F1-Macro to one trained on 3,800 human annotations (\$316). Active learning offers little advantage over random sampling in our pre-enriched pool and delivers lower F1 than full LLM annotation at the same cost. However, comparable aggregate F1 masks a systematic difference in error structure: LLM-trained classifiers over-predict the positive class relative to the human gold standard. This divergence concentrates in topically ambiguous discussions where the distinction between anti-immigrant hostility and policy critique is most subtle, suggesting that annotation strategy should be guided not by aggregate F1 alone but by the error profile acceptable for the target application.

CLFeb 24, 2025Code
On Relation-Specific Neurons in Large Language Models

Yihong Liu, Runsheng Chen, Lea Hirlimann et al.

In large language models (LLMs), certain \emph{neurons} can store distinct pieces of knowledge learned during pretraining. While factual knowledge typically appears as a combination of \emph{relations} and \emph{entities}, it remains unclear whether some neurons focus on a relation itself -- independent of any entity. We hypothesize such neurons \emph{detect} a relation in the input text and \emph{guide} generation involving such a relation. To investigate this, we study the LLama-2 family on a chosen set of relations, with a \textit{statistics}-based method. Our experiments demonstrate the existence of relation-specific neurons. We measure the effect of selectively deactivating candidate neurons specific to relation $r$ on the LLM's ability to handle (1) facts involving relation $r$ and (2) facts involving a different relation $r' \neq r$. With respect to their capacity for encoding relation information, we give evidence for the following three properties of relation-specific neurons. \textbf{(i) Neuron cumulativity.} Multiple neurons jointly contribute to processing facts involving relation $r$, with no single neuron fully encoding a fact in $r$ on its own. \textbf{(ii) Neuron versatility.} Neurons can be shared across multiple closely related as well as less related relations. In addition, some relation neurons transfer across languages. \textbf{(iii) Neuron interference.} Deactivating neurons specific to one relation can improve LLMs' factual recall performance for facts of other relations. We make our code and data publicly available at https://github.com/cisnlp/relation-specific-neurons.

CLOct 8, 2025
BlackboxNLP-2025 MIB Shared Task: Exploring Ensemble Strategies for Circuit Localization Methods

Philipp Mondorf, Mingyang Wang, Sebastian Gerstner et al.

The Circuit Localization track of the Mechanistic Interpretability Benchmark (MIB) evaluates methods for localizing circuits within large language models (LLMs), i.e., subnetworks responsible for specific task behaviors. In this work, we investigate whether ensembling two or more circuit localization methods can improve performance. We explore two variants: parallel and sequential ensembling. In parallel ensembling, we combine attribution scores assigned to each edge by different methods-e.g., by averaging or taking the minimum or maximum value. In the sequential ensemble, we use edge attribution scores obtained via EAP-IG as a warm start for a more expensive but more precise circuit identification method, namely edge pruning. We observe that both approaches yield notable gains on the benchmark metrics, leading to a more precise circuit identification approach. Finally, we find that taking a parallel ensemble over various methods, including the sequential ensemble, achieves the best results. We evaluate our approach in the BlackboxNLP 2025 MIB Shared Task, comparing ensemble scores to official baselines across multiple model-task combinations.

CLJun 3, 2025
Time Course MechInterp: Analyzing the Evolution of Components and Knowledge in Large Language Models

Ahmad Dawar Hakimi, Ali Modarressi, Philipp Wicke et al.

Understanding how large language models (LLMs) acquire and store factual knowledge is crucial for enhancing their interpretability and reliability. In this work, we analyze the evolution of factual knowledge representation in the OLMo-7B model by tracking the roles of its attention heads and feed forward networks (FFNs) over the course of pre-training. We classify these components into four roles: general, entity, relation-answer, and fact-answer specific, and examine their stability and transitions. Our results show that LLMs initially depend on broad, general-purpose components, which later specialize as training progresses. Once the model reliably predicts answers, some components are repurposed, suggesting an adaptive learning process. Notably, attention heads display the highest turnover. We also present evidence that FFNs remain more stable throughout training. Furthermore, our probing experiments reveal that location-based relations converge to high accuracy earlier in training than name-based relations, highlighting how task complexity shapes acquisition dynamics. These insights offer a mechanistic view of knowledge formation in LLMs.