Paper Citation Record · LEDGER

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification

As of 10 August 2026, this Paper Citation Record lists 14 of 14 outbound references and 0 inbound Pith citation observations for arXiv:2410.03296.

A citation records a reference. It does not transfer a finding from one paper to another.

pith.paper-citation-record.v1
2410.03296 v4

Coverage vector

measured 14 of 14 reference resolution

Typed states for the displayed outbound observations.

Source: paper_references, paper_reference_links, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:20.738920Z

measured 14 of 14 standing notices

One-hop event checks from named stored sources.

Source: scholarly_work_events, retraction_status_cache, observed 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00

measured 0 of 0 inbound itemization

Pith citing papers itemized under the disclosed page cap.

Source: paper_references, paper_reference_links

measured 0 of 1 external citation measurements

A source-named dated measurement, never combined with another source.

Source: cited_works

Reference resolution

14 of 14 outbound references displayed

verified exact3
verified fuzzy7
unresolved1
parse uncertain0
malformed identifier1
metadata mismatch2

External citation measurements

No source-named external measurement is stored.

Outbound references

Observation 1828b972-a9dd-4c55-a2b8-1ecbf58bf901 · outbound

This paper cites Faithfulness vs. Plausibility: On the (Un)Reliability of Explanations from Large Language Models.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Faithfulness vs. Plausibility: On the (Un)Reliability of Explanations from Large Language Models

Reference 1

Resolution: verified exact; arxiv_id, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:22.968721Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 5b3dc910-aacb-438a-aef1-5de525653bbc · outbound

This paper cites In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 6907–6920, Singapore.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 6907–6920, Singapore

Reference 2

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.106382Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 6ac44560-595b-4689-ac11-3da87e552b06 · outbound

This paper cites Can Large Language Models Explain Themselves? A Study of LLM-Generated Self-Explanations.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Can Large Language Models Explain Themselves? A Study of LLM-Generated Self-Explanations

Reference 3

Resolution: verified exact; arxiv_id, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:22.944652Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation f043ca07-a770-477f-ab0f-4bd9d40cbfba · outbound

This paper cites In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1597–1611, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Re- public.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1597–1611, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Re- public

Reference 4

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.127437Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 9b804036-7e21-490f-936c-096c3ff2e027 · outbound

This paper cites Are self-explanations from Large Language Models faithful?.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Are self-explanations from Large Language Models faithful?

Reference 5

Resolution: verified exact; arxiv_id, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:22.935961Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 1e1e73ee-90c1-476d-9847-b55905603a81 · outbound

This paper cites In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pages 13025– 13048, Bangkok, Thailand.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pages 13025– 13048, Bangkok, Thailand

Reference 6

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.121450Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 4e568092-1132-404b-bb9b-2311bca0e6c1 · outbound

This paper cites In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1631–1642, Seattle, Washington, USA.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1631–1642, Seattle, Washington, USA

Reference 7

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.097217Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 96357532-9281-4267-b88d-b15ed84cfbfe · outbound

This paper cites Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models

Reference 8

Resolution: metadata mismatch; local_arxiv, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:22.961788Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 77582b42-fc07-4d55-9f8f-1e2386d7f026 · outbound

This paper cites an unresolved cited work.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Unresolved cited work

Reference 9

Resolution: unresolved; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.131707Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation e1e09c6e-e4e6-46fa-adb2-83bc9ab80ba7 · outbound

This paper cites In Pro- ceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing, pages 184–198, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification In Pro- ceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing, pages 184–198, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Reference 10

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.116176Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation a4dd60db-ff47-4e21-84a9-306ab814e4cc · outbound

This paper cites Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences

Reference 11

Resolution: metadata mismatch; local_arxiv, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:22.951294Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 4f173a37-0bd8-40f0-b4e8-9f87bffa4c29 · outbound

This paper cites Figure 13 show the same POS analysis for RaFoLa.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Figure 13 show the same POS analysis for RaFoLa

Reference 12

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.101645Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation 93faaea7-4b4d-4011-8a36-23b54fd020ca · outbound

This paper cites Both Llama3 and Mistral have a low error rate with 2% and 5% respectively.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification Both Llama3 and Mistral have a low error rate with 2% and 5% respectively

Reference 13

Resolution: verified fuzzy; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.092587Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Observation e4ef0b77-4f9a-4d7e-a388-c363418017c0 · outbound

This paper cites E.3 Entity analysis SST RaFoLa Figure 14: Comparing plausibility scores for non-contrastive and contrastive post-hoc approaches using Kappa agreement scores.

A Systematic Comparison between Extractive Self-Explanations and Human Rationales in Text Classification E.3 Entity analysis SST RaFoLa Figure 14: Comparing plausibility scores for non-contrastive and contrastive post-hoc approaches using Kappa agreement scores

Reference 14

Resolution: malformed identifier; raw_fallback, observed 2026-05-23T19:48:23.111481Z

Source-reported events for the cited work

No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.

Pith citing papers

No inbound Pith citation observations are available.