Understanding the dynamics of counseling conversations is an important task, yet it is a challenging NLP problem regardless of the recent advance of Transformer-based pre-trained language models. This paper proposes a systematic approach to examine the efficacy of domain knowledge and large language models (LLMs) in better representing conversations between a crisis counselor and a help seeker. We empirically show that state-of-the-art language models such as Transformer-based models and GPT models fail to predict the conversation outcome. To provide richer context to conversations, we incorporate human-annotated domain knowledge and LLM-generated features; simple integration of domain knowledge and LLM features improves the model performance by approximately 15%. We argue that both domain knowledge and LLM-generated features can be exploited to better characterize counseling conversations when they are used as an additional context to conversations.

Item categorization (IC) aims to classify product descriptions into leaf nodes in a categorical taxonomy, which is a key technology used in a wide range of applications. Along with the fact that most datasets often has a long-tailed distribution, classification performances on tail labels tend to be poor due to scarce supervision, causing many issues in real-life applications. To address IC task’s long-tail issue, K-positive contrastive loss (KCL) is proposed on image classification task and can be applied on the IC task when using text-based contrastive learning, e.g., SimCSE. However, one shortcoming of using KCL has been neglected in previous research: false negative (FN) instances may harm the KCL’s representation learning. To address the FN issue in the KCL, we proposed to re-weight the positive pairs in the KCL loss with a regularization that the sum of weights should be constrained to K+1 as close as possible. After controlling FN instances with the proposed method, IC performance has been further improved and is superior to other LT-addressing methods.

Large-scale language models have been reducing the gap between machines and humans in understanding the real world, yet understanding an individual’s theory of mind and behavior from text is far from being resolved. This research proposes a neural model—Subjective Ground Attention—that learns subjective grounds of individuals and accounts for their judgments on situations of others posted on social media. Using simple attention modules as well as taking one’s previous activities into consideration, we empirically show that our model provides human-readable explanations of an individual’s subjective preference in judging social situations. We further qualitatively evaluate the explanations generated by the model and claim that our model learns an individual’s subjective orientation towards abstract moral concepts.

The context-dependent nature of online aggression makes annotating large collections of data extremely difficult. Previously studied datasets in abusive language detection have been insufficient in size to efficiently train deep learning models. Recently, Hate and Abusive Speech on Twitter, a dataset much greater in size and reliability, has been released. However, this dataset has not been comprehensively studied to its potential. In this paper, we conduct the first comparative study of various learning models on Hate and Abusive Speech on Twitter, and discuss the possibility of using additional features and context data for improvements. Experimental results show that bidirectional GRU networks trained on word-level features, with Latent Topic Clustering modules, is the most accurate model scoring 0.805 F1.