Pith. sign in

iSarcasm: A Dataset of Intended Sarcasm

1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.

1 Pith paper citing it
abstract

We consider the distinction between intended and perceived sarcasm in the context of textual sarcasm detection. The former occurs when an utterance is sarcastic from the perspective of its author, while the latter occurs when the utterance is interpreted as sarcastic by the audience. We show the limitations of previous labelling methods in capturing intended sarcasm and introduce the iSarcasm dataset of tweets labeled for sarcasm directly by their authors. Examining the state-of-the-art sarcasm detection models on our dataset showed low performance compared to previously studied datasets, which indicates that these datasets might be biased or obvious and sarcasm could be a phenomenon under-studied computationally thus far. By providing the iSarcasm dataset, we aim to encourage future NLP research to develop methods for detecting sarcasm in text as intended by the authors of the text, not as labeled under assumptions that we demonstrate to be sub-optimal.

fields

cs.CL 1

years

2025 1

verdicts

CONDITIONAL 1

representative citing papers

Can Third-parties Read Our Emotions?

cs.CL · 2025-04-25 · conditional · novelty 5.0

Third-party emotion annotations, both human and LLM, show low to fair agreement with authors' self-reported emotions, with LLMs outperforming humans but still misaligning substantially.

citing papers explorer

Showing 1 of 1 citing paper.

  • Can Third-parties Read Our Emotions? cs.CL · 2025-04-25 · conditional · none · ref 47 · internal anchor

    Third-party emotion annotations, both human and LLM, show low to fair agreement with authors' self-reported emotions, with LLMs outperforming humans but still misaligning substantially.