The paper critiques a recent NLI benchmark that tests the imperfective paradox, arguing that the benchmark suffers from conceptual and evaluation mis-specifications, notably Aspectual Reduction and a lack of strict NLI standards. The authors re-evaluate the benchmark, identify mis-specifications, and construct lexically matched minimal pairs to control for lexical variation. Their experiments reveal that models often exhibit a Sufficiency Bias, accept simple‑past hypotheses without affirming culmination, and that prompting interventions shift label decisions without improving true semantic understanding, highlighting additional failure modes such as compositional aspectual classification errors and surface‑form attraction.
By Kaiqiao Han, Yizhou Sun
arXiv:2609.34187v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: The strong version of the stochastic parrot argument claims that, although large language models (LLMs) may exceed rote regurgitation, they c...
By Julia Witte Zimmerman, Calla G. Beauregard, Tabia Tanzin Prama, Parisa Suchdev, Kathryn Cramer, Elisabeth Kollrack
The paper investigates how adjectival modifiers affect the semantic plausibility of events, using the Adept benchmark of 16,000 English sentence pairs that differ by a single adjective. Experiments show that sentence transformers, despite being conceptually suited to the task, underperform compared to models like RoBERTa. The authors provide an error analysis and discuss the implications of their findings for future work on balancing training and test data.
By Anna Golub, Beate Zywietz, Annerose Eichel
Do language models carry information about narrative events before writing them, and how far ahead? We examine narrative lookahead through salient, state-changing events rather than tokens or response...
arXiv:2609.37497v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Modern transformer models excel at capturing semantic relationships through sentence embeddings, yet their ability to perform pragmatic reasoning remai...
By Stefania Butnaru, Claudiu Creanga
arXiv:2610.02549v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Time and event expression extraction are fundamental temporal reasoning tasks, but the problem remains difficult due to annotation ambiguity, domain se...
By Fahmid Shahriar Iqbal, Ritam Dutt, Soumitra Das, Arnav Verma, Sagnik Ray Choudhury
arXiv:2609.38406v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Access to real-world information is often noisy and fragmented. Constructing a coherent narrative from such fragments requires models to reconstruct mi...
By Eftekhar Hossain, John Salvador, Santu Karmaker
arXiv:2601. 02023v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly utilize massive context windows as working memory for autonomous tasks, their reliability fluctuates significantly depending on how information is distributed in real-world corpora.
By Amirali Ebrahimzadeh, Seyyed M. Salili
The paper introduces a new task called reconciliatory explanation generation, where large language models (LLMs) must produce explanations that make contradictory statements compatible. It proposes reusing natural language inference datasets and new quality metrics for scalable evaluation. Experiments with 13 LLMs show limited success, especially when longer reasoning chains are involved, but reinforcement‑learning training improves performance on two narrative reasoning benchmarks.
By Jason Chan, Zhixue Zhao, Robert Gaizauskas
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.
As large language models (LLMs) grow more capable, they are increasingly deployed in context-rich settings where task inputs are often accompanied by long, partially irrelevant context. In a controlled setting, we find that state-of-the-art models often appear robust to task-irrelevant context at the aggregate level: prepending it to benchmark questions causes little change in overall accuracy.
The study introduces a Difference in Surprisal method that uses GPT‑2 token surprisal to automatically label telicity in English CHILDES corpora, validated against expert judgments. Logistic regression classifiers trained on 12 syntactic and lexical semantic features reveal that child speech achieves near‑perfect telicity classification using a single deterministic cue—the presence of a post‑verbal determiner—whereas adult speech relies more on verb class and other lexical semantic features, with the determiner cue neutralized. This developmental trajectory supports syntactic bootstrapping, showing that learners initially exploit high‑frequency structural cues before developing fully compositional, verb‑based event structures.
By Ellie Xia, Parisa Kordjamshidi, Alan Hezao Ke