Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

KRISTEVA: Close Reading as a Novel Task for Benchmarking Interpretive Reasoning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2505.09825 v2 pith:46AV54WI submitted 2025-05-14 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords closereadingkristevallmsreasoningcollege-levelinterpretiveliterary
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Each year, tens of millions of essays are written and graded in college-level English courses. Students are asked to analyze literary and cultural texts through a process known as close reading, in which they gather textual details to formulate evidence-based arguments. Despite being viewed as a basis for critical thinking and widely adopted as a required element of university coursework, close reading has never been evaluated on large language models (LLMs), and multi-discipline benchmarks like MMLU do not include literature as a subject. To fill this gap, we present KRISTEVA, the first close reading benchmark for evaluating interpretive reasoning, consisting of 1331 multiple-choice questions adapted from classroom data. With KRISTEVA, we propose three progressively more difficult sets of tasks to approximate different elements of the close reading process, which we use to test how well LLMs may seem to understand and reason about literary works: 1) extracting stylistic features, 2) retrieving relevant contextual information from parametric knowledge, and 3) multi-hop reasoning between style and external contexts. Our baseline results find that, while state-of-the-art LLMs possess some college-level close reading competency (accuracy 49.7% - 69.7%), their performances still trail those of experienced human evaluators on 10 out of our 11 tasks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Tell, Don't Show: Leveraging Language Models' Abstractive Retellings to Model Literary Themes

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Retell, a method that runs LDA on language models' abstractive retellings of literary passages, produces more theme-level topics than LDA alone or direct LM topic labeling.

Pith tools