Hugging Face Trending Papers

C$^{3}$T: Counterfactual Causal Reasoning for Sentiment Shifts in Social-Media Conversation Trees

The paper introduces C$^{3}$T, a Counterfactual Causal Conversation Transformer that models sentiment shifts in social‑media conversation trees by treating discourse moves such as denial, evidence, and toxicity as interventions. It adds a causal sentiment reasoning layer, CaSiRe, to public rumor datasets, providing sentiment, shift, intervention, and causal‑source annotations. Experiments show that C$^{3}$T outperforms text‑only, graph‑based, and temporal baselines in predicting sentiment and attribution, revealing that denials and evidence reduce negativity while toxicity increases it.

arXiv AI
Sep 3

C$^{3}$T: Counterfactual Causal Reasoning for Sentiment Shifts in Social-Media Conversation Trees

The paper introduces C$^{3}$T, a Counterfactual Causal Conversation Transformer that models sentiment shifts in social‑media conversation trees. It treats discourse moves such as denial, evidence, and toxicity as interventions, predicts node sentiment and shifts, and attributes sentiment changes to specific ancestor messages. The authors also present CaSiRe, a causal sentiment reasoning layer that enriches rumor conversation datasets with sentiment, shift, intervention, and causal‑source annotations, and demonstrate that C$^{3}$T outperforms baseline models in robustness and interpretability.

By S M Rafiuddin, Atriya Sen
arXiv AI
Aug 26

From Causal Plausibility to Causal Reliability: Evaluating LLMs as Calibrated Direct Causal-Edge Classifiers

The study evaluates 12 instruction‑tuned open‑weight LLMs on six causal‑graph benchmarks, testing five prompting strategies and four confidence sources. Findings show that LLMs tend to over‑predict edges, misclassify indirect or reversed edges as direct, and exhibit high over‑confidence, while conventional confidence estimates are unreliable and agreement signals offer limited improvement. The results suggest LLMs should be used as externally validated soft causal priors rather than definitive causal‑structure evidence.

By Amit Kumar, Elnur Adl Zarabi, Suranjana Trivedy, Zhiqian Chen, Lei Zhang, Kaiqun Fu, Taoran Ji
arXiv AI
Oct 12

CoBe: A Benchmark For Conversational Counterfactual Text Editing

CoBe is a benchmark that evaluates a model’s ability to perform conversational counterfactual text editing, requiring the model to revise a given scenario based on a hypothetical change while preserving unaffected facts. The dataset includes 2,000 questions across domains such as healthcare, science, engineering, business, and everyday life. Experiments show that current models often default to associational generation rather than maintaining causal structure, and performance does not reliably improve with larger model size or longer outputs.

By Arvind Raghavan, Inwoo Hwang, Shreyas Havaldar, Kai-Zhan Lee, Aurghya Maiti, Yushu Pan, Jeffrey Wu, Mingxuan Li, Elias Bareinboim
arXiv AI
Oct 15

A Counterfactual Graph Approach to Oppositional Narrative Analysis

The paper introduces a modular framework that builds an entity‑interaction graph from narratives without relying on annotated node labels. It uses a domain‑adapted BERT encoder to identify entity spans, constructs a bipartite graph, and classifies it with a Heterogeneous Graph Transformer. By casting the graph as a hypergraph and applying counterfactual distillation, the method estimates the Individual Treatment Effect of each node, pruning extraneous entities to produce a minimal predictive subgraph while maintaining high accuracy on the PAN Oppositional Narratives benchmark.

By Diego Revilla, Martin Fernandez-de-Retana, Lingfeng Chen, Aritz Bilbao-Jayo, Miguel Fernandez-de-Retana