Understanding covert narratives and implicit messaging is essential for analyzing bias and sentiment. Traditional NLP methods struggle with detecting subtle phrasing and hidden agendas. This study tackles two key challenges: (1) multi-label classification of narratives and sub-narratives in news articles, and (2) generating concise, evidence-based explanations for dominant narratives. We fine-tune a BERT model with a recall-oriented approach for comprehensive narrative detection, refining predictions using a GPT-4o pipeline for consistency. For narrative explanation, we propose a ReACT (Reasoning + Acting) framework with semantic retrieval-based few-shot prompting, ensuring grounded and relevant justifications. To enhance factual accuracy and reduce hallucinations, we incorporate a structured taxonomy table as an auxiliary knowledge base. Our results show that integrating auxiliary knowledge in prompts improves classification accuracy and justification reliability, with applications in media analysis, education, and intelligence gathering.

Question Answering over Tabular Data (Table QA) presents unique challenges due to the diverse structure, size, and data types of real-world tables. The SemEval 2025 Task 8 (DataBench) introduced a benchmark composed of large-scale, domain-diverse datasets to evaluate the ability of models to accurately answer structured queries. We propose a Natural Language to SQL (NL-to-SQL) approach leveraging large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, and DeepSeek v2:16b to generate SQL queries dynamically. Our system follows a multi-stage pipeline involving example selection, SQL query generation, answer extraction, verification, and iterative refinement. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, achieving 70.5% accuracy on DataBench QA and 71.6% on DataBench Lite QA, significantly surpassing baseline scores of 26% and 27% respectively. This paper details our methodology, experimental results, and alternative approaches, providing insights into the strengths and limitations of LLM-driven Table QA.