jonc commited on
Commit
6cbd52a
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): 832c72e

Upload README.md with huggingface_hub

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. README.md +39 -11
README.md CHANGED
@@ -33,17 +33,27 @@ dataset_info:
33
  dtype: string
34
  - name: power_relation
35
  dtype: string
36
- - name: social_context
37
- dtype: string
38
  - name: gold_standard
39
  dtype: string
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
40
  splits:
41
  - name: train
42
- num_examples: 210
43
  - name: validation
44
- num_examples: 45
45
  - name: test
46
- num_examples: 45
47
  ---
48
 
49
  # CEI: A Benchmark for Evaluating Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Models
@@ -62,7 +72,26 @@ CEI (Contextual Emotional Inference) is a benchmark of 300 expert-authored scena
62
  ### Scenarios
63
  - **300 scenarios** across 5 pragmatic subtypes (60 each)
64
  - **3 independent annotations** per scenario (900 total)
65
- - **Predefined splits:** train (210), validation (45), test (45), stratified by subtype and power relation
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
66
 
67
  ### Pragmatic Subtypes
68
  | Subtype | Description | Fleiss' kappa |
@@ -75,9 +104,8 @@ CEI (Contextual Emotional Inference) is a benchmark of 300 expert-authored scena
75
 
76
  ### Labels
77
  - **Primary emotion:** One of Plutchik's 8 basic emotions (joy, trust, fear, surprise, sadness, disgust, anger, anticipation)
78
- - **VAD ratings:** Valence, Arousal, Dominance on 7-point scales mapped to [-1.0, +1.0]
79
- - **Confidence:** Annotator self-reported confidence
80
- - **Gold standard:** Majority vote with expert adjudication
81
 
82
  ### Power Relations
83
  - Peer (72%), High-to-Low authority (20%), Low-to-High authority (7%)
@@ -85,7 +113,7 @@ CEI (Contextual Emotional Inference) is a benchmark of 300 expert-authored scena
85
  ## Key Statistics
86
  - **Inter-annotator agreement:** Overall kappa = 0.21 (fair), ranging from 0.06 (deflection) to 0.25 (sarcasm)
87
  - **Human accuracy (vs. gold):** 61% mean, 14.3% unanimous, 31.3% three-way split
88
- - **Best LLM baseline:** 25.7% accuracy (Phi-4, zero-shot) vs. 54% human majority agreement
89
  - **Random baseline:** 12.5% (8-class)
90
 
91
  ## Intended Uses
@@ -104,7 +132,7 @@ CEI (Contextual Emotional Inference) is a benchmark of 300 expert-authored scena
104
  ```bibtex
105
  @article{chun2026cei,
106
  title={CEI: A Benchmark for Evaluating Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Models},
107
- author={Chun, Jon and Sussman, Hannah and Mangine, Adrian and Kocaman, Murathan and Sidorko, Kirill and Koirala, Abhigya and McCloud, Andre and Eisenbeis, Gwen and Akanwe, Wisdom and Gassama, Moustapha and Gonzalez Chirinos, Eliezer and Enright, Anne-Duncan and Dunson, Peter and Ng, Tiffanie and von Rosenstiel, Anna and Idowu, Godwin},
108
  journal={Journal of Data-centric Machine Learning Research (DMLR)},
109
  year={2026}
110
  }
 
33
  dtype: string
34
  - name: power_relation
35
  dtype: string
 
 
36
  - name: gold_standard
37
  dtype: string
38
+ - name: ann1_emotion
39
+ dtype: string
40
+ - name: ann2_emotion
41
+ dtype: string
42
+ - name: ann3_emotion
43
+ dtype: string
44
+ - name: valence_mean
45
+ dtype: float64
46
+ - name: arousal_mean
47
+ dtype: float64
48
+ - name: dominance_mean
49
+ dtype: float64
50
  splits:
51
  - name: train
52
+ num_examples: 211
53
  - name: validation
54
+ num_examples: 48
55
  - name: test
56
+ num_examples: 41
57
  ---
58
 
59
  # CEI: A Benchmark for Evaluating Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Models
 
72
  ### Scenarios
73
  - **300 scenarios** across 5 pragmatic subtypes (60 each)
74
  - **3 independent annotations** per scenario (900 total)
75
+ - **Predefined splits:** train (211), validation (48), test (41), stratified by subtype and power relation
76
+
77
+ ### Fields
78
+
79
+ | Field | Type | Description |
80
+ |-------|------|-------------|
81
+ | `id` | int | Scenario ID (unique within subtype) |
82
+ | `subtype` | string | Pragmatic subtype (sarcasm-irony, mixed-signals, strategic-politeness, passive-aggression, deflection-misdirection) |
83
+ | `context` | string | Situational context (2-4 sentences) |
84
+ | `speaker` | string | Speaker's role in the scenario |
85
+ | `listener` | string | Listener's role in the scenario |
86
+ | `utterance` | string | The speaker's pragmatically ambiguous utterance |
87
+ | `power_relation` | string | Power dynamic: peer, high-to-low, or low-to-high |
88
+ | `gold_standard` | string | Gold-standard emotion (majority vote + expert adjudication) |
89
+ | `ann1_emotion` | string | Annotator 1's emotion label (Plutchik) |
90
+ | `ann2_emotion` | string | Annotator 2's emotion label (Plutchik) |
91
+ | `ann3_emotion` | string | Annotator 3's emotion label (Plutchik) |
92
+ | `valence_mean` | float | Mean valence rating across annotators (-1.0 to +1.0) |
93
+ | `arousal_mean` | float | Mean arousal rating across annotators (-1.0 to +1.0) |
94
+ | `dominance_mean` | float | Mean dominance rating across annotators (-1.0 to +1.0) |
95
 
96
  ### Pragmatic Subtypes
97
  | Subtype | Description | Fleiss' kappa |
 
104
 
105
  ### Labels
106
  - **Primary emotion:** One of Plutchik's 8 basic emotions (joy, trust, fear, surprise, sadness, disgust, anger, anticipation)
107
+ - **VAD ratings:** Mean Valence, Arousal, Dominance across 3 annotators, mapped to [-1.0, +1.0]
108
+ - **Gold standard:** Majority vote with expert adjudication for three-way splits
 
109
 
110
  ### Power Relations
111
  - Peer (72%), High-to-Low authority (20%), Low-to-High authority (7%)
 
113
  ## Key Statistics
114
  - **Inter-annotator agreement:** Overall kappa = 0.21 (fair), ranging from 0.06 (deflection) to 0.25 (sarcasm)
115
  - **Human accuracy (vs. gold):** 61% mean, 14.3% unanimous, 31.3% three-way split
116
+ - **Best LLM baseline:** 25.0% accuracy (Llama-3.1-70B, zero-shot) vs. 54% human majority agreement
117
  - **Random baseline:** 12.5% (8-class)
118
 
119
  ## Intended Uses
 
132
  ```bibtex
133
  @article{chun2026cei,
134
  title={CEI: A Benchmark for Evaluating Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Models},
135
+ author={Chun, Jon and Sussman, Hannah and Pechon-Elkins, Mateo and Mangine, Adrian and Kocaman, Murathan and Sidorko, Kirill and Koirala, Abhigya and McCloud, Andre and Eisenbeis, Gwen and Akanwe, Wisdom and Gassama, Moustapha and Gonzalez Chirinos, Eliezer and Enright, Anne-Duncan and Dunson, Peter and Ng, Tiffanie and von Rosenstiel, Anna and Idowu, Godwin},
136
  journal={Journal of Data-centric Machine Learning Research (DMLR)},
137
  year={2026}
138
  }