The NLP community has broadly focused on text-only approaches of cognitive state tasks, but audio can provide vital missing cues through prosody. We posit that text-to-speech models learn to track aspects of cognitive state in order to produce naturalistic audio, and that the signal audio models implicitly identify is orthogonal to the information that language models exploit. We present Synthetic Audio Data fine-tuning (SAD), a framework where we show that 7 tasks related to cognitive state modeling benefit from multimodal training on both text and zero-shot synthetic audio data from an off-the-shelf TTS system. We show an improvement over the text-only modality when adding synthetic audio data to text-only corpora. Furthermore, on tasks and corpora that do contain gold audio, we show our SAD framework achieves competitive performance with text and synthetic audio compared to text and gold audio.

Responsible use of Authorship Verification (AV) systems not only requires high accuracy but also interpretable solutions. More importantly, for systems to be used to make decisions with real-world consequences requires the model’s prediction to be explainable using interpretable features that can be traced to the original texts. Neural methods achieve high accuracies, but their representations lack direct interpretability. Furthermore, LLM predictions cannot be explained faithfully – if there is an explanation given for a prediction, it doesn’t represent the reasoning process behind the model’s prediction. In this paper, we introduce Residualized Similarity (RS), a novel method that supplements systems using interpretable features with a neural network to improve their performance while maintaining interpretability. Authorship verification is fundamentally a similarity task, where the goal is to measure how alike two documents are. The key idea is to use the neural network to predict a similarity residual, i.e. the error in the similarity predicted by the interpretable system. Our evaluation across four datasets shows that not only can we match the performance of state-of-the-art authorship verification models, but we can show how and to what degree the final prediction is faithful and interpretable.

Evaluating the theory of mind (ToM) capabilities of language models (LMs) has recently received a great deal of attention. However, many existing benchmarks rely on synthetic data, which risks misaligning the resulting experiments with human behavior. We introduce the first ToM dataset based on naturally occurring spoken dialogs, Common-ToM, and show that LMs struggle to demonstrate ToM. We then show that integrating a simple, explicit representation of beliefs improves LM performance on Common-ToM.

We present a corrected version of a subset of the FactBank data set. Previously published results on FactBank are no longer valid. We perform experiments on FactBank using multiple training paradigms, data smoothing techniques, and polarity classifiers. We argue that f-measure is an important alternative evaluation metric for factuality. We provide new state-of-the-art results for four corpora including FactBank. We perform an error analysis on Factbank combined with two similar corpora.