Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Do Androids Laugh at Electric Sheep? Humor "Understanding" Benchmarks from The New Yorker Caption Contest

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2209.06293 v2 pith:4WLBBKZW submitted 2022-09-13 cs.CL cs.CV

classification cs.CLcs.CV
keywords modelscaptioncartoonscenetasksunderstandingvisualbest
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large neural networks can now generate jokes, but do they really "understand" humor? We challenge AI models with three tasks derived from the New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest: matching a joke to a cartoon, identifying a winning caption, and explaining why a winning caption is funny. These tasks encapsulate progressively more sophisticated aspects of "understanding" a cartoon; key elements are the complex, often surprising relationships between images and captions and the frequent inclusion of indirect and playful allusions to human experience and culture. We investigate both multimodal and language-only models: the former are challenged with the cartoon images directly, while the latter are given multifaceted descriptions of the visual scene to simulate human-level visual understanding. We find that both types of models struggle at all three tasks. For example, our best multimodal models fall 30 accuracy points behind human performance on the matching task, and, even when provided ground-truth visual scene descriptors, human-authored explanations are preferred head-to-head over the best machine-authored ones (few-shot GPT-4) in more than 2/3 of cases. We release models, code, leaderboard, and corpus, which includes newly-gathered annotations describing the image's locations/entities, what's unusual in the scene, and an explanation of the joke.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Reasoning or Memorization: Can LLMs Understand and Generate Chinese Xiehouyu Riddles?

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Δacc between low-frequency and novel xiehouyu is ~23.6% for Chinese frontier LLMs vs ~5.1% for English-centric models and ~2.9% for humans, while LLM-created xiehouyu rate below human creations.

  2. MINT: Multimodal Instruction Tuning with Multimodal Interaction Grouping

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Grouping instruction-tuning datasets by redundancy, uniqueness, or synergy of text-image interaction improves vision-language model accuracy over single-task and unselective multi-task tuning.

  3. Anamnesis: An Open-Source Platform for Large-Scale Backstory-Conditioned Survey Simulation

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Anamnesis packages backstory-conditioned LLM personas into an interactive open-source survey platform that better matches real human opinion distributions than demographic-list prompting on ATP and New Yorker tasks.

Pith tools