REVIEW 1 cited by
Can Machines Resonate with Humans? Evaluating the Emotional and Empathic Comprehension of LMs
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
read the original abstract
Empathy plays a pivotal role in fostering prosocial behavior, often triggered by the sharing of personal experiences through narratives. However, modeling empathy using NLP approaches remains challenging due to its deep interconnection with human interaction dynamics. Previous approaches, which involve fine-tuning language models (LMs) on human-annotated empathic datasets, have had limited success. In our pursuit of improving empathy understanding in LMs, we propose several strategies, including contrastive learning with masked LMs and supervised fine-tuning with large language models. While these methods show improvements over previous methods, the overall results remain unsatisfactory. To better understand this trend, we performed an analysis which reveals a low agreement among annotators. This lack of consensus hinders training and highlights the subjective nature of the task. We also explore the cultural impact on annotations. To study this, we meticulously collected story pairs in Urdu language and find that subjectivity in interpreting empathy among annotators appears to be independent of cultural background. Our systematic exploration of LMs' understanding of empathy reveals substantial opportunities for further investigation in both task formulation and modeling.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Discrete Minds in a Continuous World: Do Language Models Know Time Passes?
LLMs can judge relative response lengths and shorten outputs under urgency, but the claim that they perceive physical time passage is not cleanly established.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.