Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

A Survey of Event Causality Identification: Taxonomy, Challenges, Assessment, and Prospects

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes the first comprehensive taxonomy for event causality identification, splitting the field into sentence-level and document-level tasks, and benchmarks established model families on four datasets to show where each…

desk verdict Useful SECI/DECI taxonomy and qualitative assessment, but the benchmark's top rankings rest on two models evaluated under a different protocol. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10371 v5 pith:GTG32B6N submitted 2024-11-15 cs.CL cs.AI

Qing Cheng , Zefan Zeng , Xingchen Hu , Yuehang Si , Zhong Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords eventcausalityidentificationtaxonomysurveysentence-levelECIdocument-levellargelanguagemodelscausalhallucinationinformationextraction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper is a survey, and its central claim is that the field of event causality identification (ECI) can be organized by a single taxonomy: sentence-level ECI (SECI) and document-level ECI (DECI), each with a small set of technical families. It also claims to give the first quantitative comparison of these families on four benchmark datasets, using precision, recall, and F1 for both intra- and inter-sentence causal pairs. If right, researchers gain a shared map of the design space and a reference ranking that shows which approaches balance precision and recall best. The main empirical finding is a trade-off: prompt-based fine-tuning and external-knowledge methods lead in balanced performance, while plain LLM prompting gets high recall but many false positives, which the paper calls causal hallucination.

What carries the argument

The central object is the taxonomy itself, and the mechanism that carries the argument is event-pair classification: for a text with event mentions, each model must label every pair of events as cause, caused_by, or none. The survey describes all reviewed methods as different ways of producing event-pair embeddings — through patterns, engineered features, PLM encoders, prompt templates, graph aggregation, or LLM reasoning — and then compares those embeddings with a classifier. The four-dataset evaluation protocol is the instrument that turns the taxonomy into a ranking, reporting F1 separately for sentence-internal and cross-sentence pairs.

What would settle it

Re-run Dr. ECI and CPATT on CTB, ESL, MAVEN-ERE, and MECI under the exact preprocessing and data splits applied to the other reproduced baselines; if either model's F1 drops below the best non-flagged baseline, the survey's comparative ranking is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is a map plus a measurement. Every ECI method reviewed is placed in a taxonomy with two branches — SECI and DECI — and within each branch a few technical families: feature pattern matching, machine-learning classification, deep semantic encoding, prompt-based fine-tuning, and causal knowledge pre-training for SECI; deep encoding, event-graph reasoning, prompt fine-tuning, LLM-based reasoning, and multi-lingual transfer for DECI. The measurement is a four-dataset comparison reporting precision, recall, and F1, separated into intra-sentence and inter-sentence causality, plus a multi-lingual benchmark. The consistent result is that prompt-based and knowledge-enhanced methods balance precision and recall, while simple LLM methods show high recall with low precision, a pattern attributed to causal hallucination.

Load-bearing premise

The benchmark rankings assume every model was evaluated under the same data-processing and splitting protocol, but the appendix states that Dr. ECI and CPATT, two of the top scorers, used distinct data processing, so the headline ordering can reflect evaluation differences rather than model quality alone.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A shared taxonomy lets future ECI papers position new methods in one family and compare against a common set of baselines rather than launching new task formulations.
  • Prompt-based fine-tuning and knowledge-enhanced encoding should be treated as the strong defaults for SECI, since they lead in balanced F1 and in suppression of false positives.
  • Document-level causality remains the harder task, with consistently lower inter-sentence F1 across families, so graph reasoning and prompt-based methods that aggregate global context are the promising direction.
  • For LLM-based ECI, the practical implication is to add consistency checks, external knowledge, or decomposed reasoning before deployment, because plain prompting with a strong LLM produces too many false positives.
  • Multilingual ECI is not solved by English-centric methods: low-resource languages in the MECI benchmark lag even for strong LLMs, so cross-lingual transfer needs dedicated alignment.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the comparability caveat is resolved and the ranking survives, the natural next step the authors do not take is a public leaderboard with a single, audited preprocessing pipeline; that would turn the one-time comparison into a living benchmark.
  • The taxonomy implies a recipe for hybrid models — combine event-graph reasoning with LLM consistency checking — that the survey itself does not test; a controlled comparison of such hybrids against the current top systems would be a direct test of the survey's map.
  • Because the four benchmark datasets are news- or encyclopedia-style, the ranking may not transfer to finance or healthcare; re-running the same protocol on domain corpora would show whether the taxonomy's families keep their relative advantages.
  • The survey's 'first comprehensive taxonomy' claim could be checked by applying the taxonomy to methods published after the survey's cutoff; a method that fits no family would mark the taxonomy as incomplete rather than wrong.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a survey of Event Causality Identification (ECI) in NLP. It formalizes ECI, reviews benchmark datasets and evaluation metrics, and proposes a taxonomy that separates Sentence-level ECI (SECI) from Document-level ECI (DECI), with subcategories for feature-pattern matching, machine-learning classification, deep semantic encoding, prompt-based fine-tuning, causal knowledge pre-training, data augmentation, graph reasoning, and LLM-based methods. It also contains a qualitative assessment in Tables 6 and 7, a quantitative comparison on CTB, ESL, MAVEN-ERE, and MECI in Appendix A, and a discussion of future directions and applications. The paper claims two headline contributions: the first comprehensive taxonomy for ECI and a rigorous quantitative performance evaluation of existing methods.

Significance. If the taxonomy is adopted, it gives the community a useful structured map of ECI methods, and the survey's coverage of roughly a decade of work, including recent LLM-based approaches, is a service to the field. The qualitative assessment in Section 7.1 and the detailed experimental appendix also provide a starting point for benchmarking, and the authors have made an organized dataset repository publicly available. Those strengths are real. However, the quantitative assessment is the part of the paper that is most exposed, and the benchmark's comparability problems are load-bearing for the 'rigorous performance evaluations' claim in the abstract. The taxonomy and qualitative discussion can stand, but the numerical rankings need to be repaired or substantially re-scoped.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A.1, footnote 8] The footnote states that Dr. ECI and CPATT 'employed distinct data processing methods compared to other baselines' and marks them with Δ. This is a direct admission that the top-performing entries in the benchmark were not evaluated under the same protocol as the rest. In Tables 8, 9, and 10, Dr. ECIΔ is reported as the best or second-best method on CTB, ESL, and MAVEN-ERE, and CPATTΔ is also highlighted in the CTB and ESL rankings. The gap between Dr. ECI (13.0 F1 on CTB) and Dr. ECIΔ (82.2 F1) is far too large to be explained by prompting or reasoning differences alone; it implies a change in candidate pairs, negative sampling, filtering, or test subset. Because the processing difference is not specified, the rankings in Section A.2 conflate evaluation choices with model quality, and the claim of 'rigorous performance evaluations' in the abstract is not supported for the top-scoring entries. The authors should either re-run Dr. ECI and CPATT under the exact common protocol used for other baselines, or explicitly present their results as non-comparable and remove them from the ranked headlines and from statements such as 'Dr. ECIΔ achieved the highest F1 score'.
  2. [Appendix A.1, Implementation Details] The benchmark mixes numbers that were directly cited from original papers with numbers that the authors reproduced, using an asterisk marker for reproduced results. This is a reasonable practice in principle, but the tables do not carry a source column, so the reader cannot always tell which numbers come from which pipeline. More importantly, the footnote about Δ shows that at least two entries do not follow the common protocol, and the text does not specify what 'distinct data processing' means. Since the paper's comparative conclusion depends on all models being evaluated on the same candidate pair set and the same data splits, the authors should add a protocol/source column to every results table and specify the exact preprocessing used by Dr. ECI and CPATT, or exclude them from the comparison.
  3. [Section 7.2 and Tables 8–10] All reported F1 values are point estimates without standard deviations, confidence intervals, or significance tests. For setups like 5-fold cross-validation on ESL and 10-fold cross-validation on CTB, differences of a few F1 points can easily be within run-to-run or fold-to-fold variance. The paper uses these point estimates to discuss which methods are 'top performers' and to compare broad categories of methods. Without variance information, the quantitative assessment is weaker than the text implies, and the reader cannot determine whether the reported ordering is stable. Adding per-model standard deviations or at least a statement about the number of runs would materially strengthen the benchmark.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5.3] The opening sentence, 'Seem to models for SECI, prompt-based fine-tuning methods DECI methods use PLMs...', is ungrammatical and should be revised to something like 'Similar to SECI, prompt-based fine-tuning DECI methods use PLMs...'.
  2. [Table 12] The header 'ESC' appears to be a typo for 'ESL'; the surrounding text and earlier sections consistently refer to the Event StoryLine Corpus as ESL.
  3. [Figure 12] The caption contains the misspelling 'corss MECI dataset' and should read 'cross MECI dataset'.
  4. [Section 8.7] The word 'halluciantion' should be corrected to 'hallucination'.
  5. [References] The reference list contains duplicate entries: [122] and [123] are both O'Gorman, Wright-Bettner, and Palmer 2016, and [194] and [195] are both Zhao et al. 2024. These should be consolidated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the survey's taxonomy and benchmarks aggregate external results, and the only self-citation is descriptive rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

This survey contains no derivation chain in which an output is constructed from its own inputs. The taxonomy organizes published methods into SECI/DECI categories; the qualitative Tables 6-7 are explicitly described as 'a qualitative, relative comparison... intended to serve as a reference only,' and the quantitative comparison in Appendix A reports reproduced or published scores from external papers rather than fitting a model to an outcome and then re-predicting that outcome. The single self-citation, KLop [184], appears among LLM-based ECI methods and in Tables 1, 6, and 7 as a descriptive entry in the taxonomy; no conclusion, benchmark ranking, uniqueness claim, or protocol is justified by it, so it is not load-bearing. Appendix A.1 flags that 'Dr. ECI and CPATT employed distinct data processing methods compared to other baselines' and marks those systems with Δ; this is a comparability limitation in the benchmark portion of the survey, but it does not make the paper's claims equivalent to its inputs by construction. No self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, renaming, or imported-uniqueness circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The survey's conclusions rest on the choice of causality definition, on the correctness of annotated datasets, and on the comparability of reported model results. It does not introduce free parameters or invented entities.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Event causality is defined by enablement/prevention, counterfactual dependence, or deterministic implication (Definition 2.1).
    The survey builds its taxonomy and evaluation on this definition; if the field adopts a different definition, many classifications and dataset choices would change.
  • domain assumption Annotated causal pairs in CTB, Event StoryLine, MAVEN-ERE, and MECI are reliable ground truth.
    The performance comparisons assume dataset labels are correct and comparable, even though Appendix A.3 itself documents annotation inconsistencies across datasets.
  • domain assumption Results reported in cited papers are accurate and use comparable evaluation protocols.
    Many entries in Tables 8 to 11 are copied from original papers rather than independently reproduced, and the survey's own delta markers show protocol differences that weaken this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Survey of Event Causality Identification: Taxonomy, Challenges, Assessment, and Prospects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GTG32B6N

@misc{pith2026241110371,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Survey of Event Causality Identification: Taxonomy, Challenges, Assessment, and Prospects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GTG32B6N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10371}
}
read the original abstract

Event Causality Identification (ECI) has become an essential task in Natural Language Processing (NLP), focused on automatically detecting causal relationships between events within texts. This comprehensive survey systematically investigates fundamental concepts and models, developing a systematic taxonomy and critically evaluating diverse models. We begin by defining core concepts, formalizing the ECI problem, and outlining standard evaluation protocols. Our classification framework divides ECI models into two primary tasks: Sentence-level Event Causality Identification (SECI) and Document-level Event Causality Identification (DECI). For SECI, we review models employing feature pattern-based matching, machine learning classifiers, deep semantic encoding, prompt-based fine-tuning, and causal knowledge pre-training, alongside data augmentation strategies. For DECI, we focus on approaches utilizing deep semantic encoding, event graph reasoning, and prompt-based fine-tuning. Special attention is given to recent advancements in multi-lingual and cross-lingual ECI, as well as zero-shot ECI leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs). We analyze the strengths, limitations, and unresolved challenges associated with each approach. Extensive quantitative evaluations are conducted on four benchmark datasets to rigorously assess the performance of various ECI models. We conclude by discussing future research directions and highlighting opportunities to advance the field further.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10371 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An example of ECI. The red boxes indicate event mentions. The blue solid arrows represent intra-sentence event causalities, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The feature pattern-based matching framework preprocesses and parses input sentences and events to derive semantic or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The general framework of template matching methods. Dependency graph or syntax graph/tree of the sentence is generated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: General framework of machine learning-based classification for ECI. These methods typically begin by extracting explicit or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Framework of textual information enhanced encoding for ECI. Text and event mentions, along with additional features (such [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Framework of external knowledge enhanced encoding for ECI. KGs generate supplementary annotated data enhance model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Framework of data augmentation. Methods based on generative models directly translate or generate new samples, whereas [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Framework of event graph reasoning for DECI. Event graphs can be homogeneous or heterogeneous, representing various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Performance comparison (Precision, Recall, F1) on CTB dataset. Error bars represent the range of variability across models. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Performance comparison (Precision, Recall, F1) on ESL dataset. Error bars represent the range of variability across models. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Performance comparison (Precision, Recall, F1) on MAVEN-ERE dataset. Error bars represent the range of variability across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Performance comparison (Precision, Recall, F1) corss MECI dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Performance comparison (Precision, Recall, F1) across CTB, ESL, and MAVEN-ERE datasets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_13.png]

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. Zero-Shot Event Causality Identification via Multi-source Evidence Fuzzy Aggregation with Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MEFA aggregates probability outputs from six causality sub-tasks via a fuzzy Choquet integral, improving zero-shot event causality identification by 6.2% F1 over the best unsupervised baseline.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

202 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Causal Effect Identification in Uncertain Causal Networks

    Sina Akbari, Fateme Jamshidi, Ehsan Mokhtarian, Matthew J. Vowels, Jalal Etesami, and Negar Kiyavash. 2023. Causal Effect Identification in Uncertain Causal Networks. arXiv:2208.04627 [cs.LG]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Amaal Saleh Hassan Al Hashimy and Narayanan Kulathuramaiyer. 2013. Ontology enrichment with causation relations. In 2013 IEEE Conference on Systems, Process & Control (ICSPC) . 186–192

    2013

  3. [3]

    Khalid Al-Khatib, Yufang Hou, Henning Wachsmuth, Charles Jochim, Francesca Bonin, and Benno Stein. 2020. End-to-End Argumentation Knowledge Graph Construction. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 34, 05 (April 2020), 7367–7374. Number: 05

    2020

  4. [4]

    Alonso-Moral, Roberto Confalonieri, Riccardo Guidotti, Javier Del Ser, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, and Francisco Herrera

    Sajid Ali, Tamer Abuhmed, Shaker El-Sappagh, Khan Muhammad, Jose M. Alonso-Moral, Roberto Confalonieri, Riccardo Guidotti, Javier Del Ser, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, and Francisco Herrera. 2023. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): What we know and what is left to attain Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. Information Fusion 99 (2023), 101805. Manuscr...

    2023

  5. [5]

    Waqar Ali, Weiping Zuo, Rashid Ali, Ghani Rahman, Xiaochun Zuo, and Inam Ullah. 2022. Towards Improving Causality Mining using BERT with Multi-level Feature Networks. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems 16, 11 (November 2022), 3230–3255

    2022

  6. [6]

    Wajid Ali, Wanli Zuo, Wang Ying, Rahman Ali, Gohar Rahman, and Inam Ullah. 2023. Causality extraction: A comprehensive survey and new perspective. J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inf. Sci. 35, 7 (July 2023), 25 pages

    2023

  7. [7]

    Ron Artstein and Massimo Poesio. 2017. Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics. Computational Linguistics 34, 4 (2017), 555–596

    2017

  8. [8]

    Nabiha Asghar. 2016. Automatic Extraction of Causal Relations from Natural Language Texts: A Comprehensive Survey. arXiv:1605.07895 [cs.AI]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

Show all 202 references
  1. [9]

    Raja Ayyanar, George Koomullil, and Hariharan Ramasangu. 2019. Causal Relation Classification using Convolutional Neural Networks and Grammar Tags. In 2019 IEEE 16th India Council International Conference (INDICON) . 1–3

    2019

  2. [10]

    Peters, and Arman Cohan

    Iz Beltagy, Matthew E. Peters, and Arman Cohan. 2020. Longformer: The Long-Document Transformer. arXiv:2004.05150 [cs.CL]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Jonathan Berant, Vivek Srikumar, Pei-Chun Chen, Abby Vander Linden, Brittany Harding, Brad Huang, Peter Clark, and Christopher D. Manning

  4. [12]

    Steven Bethard, William Corvey, Sara Klingenstein, and James H. Martin. 2008. Building a Corpus of Temporal-Causal Structure. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008) . European Language Resources Association (ELRA), M...

    2008

  5. [13]

    Steven Bethard and James H. Martin. 2008. Learning semantic links from a corpus of parallel temporal and causal relations. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technologies: Short Papers (Columbus, Ohio) (...

    2008

  6. [14]

    Eduardo Blanco, Nuria Castell, and Dan Moldovan. 2008. Causal Relation Extraction. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC‘08) , Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Jan Odijk, Stelios Pipe...

    2008

  7. [15]

    Danushka Bollegala, Simon Maskell, Richard Sloane, Joanna Hajne, and Munir Pirmohamed. 2018. Causality Patterns for Detecting Adverse Drug Reactions From Social Media: Text Mining Approach. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance 4, 2 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Antoine Bosselut, Hannah Rashkin, Maarten Sap, Chaitanya Malaviya, Asli Celikyilmaz, and Yejin Choi. 2019. COMET: Commonsense Transformers for Automatic Knowledge Graph Construction. InProceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 4762–4779

    2019

  9. [17]

    Ruichu Cai, Shengyin Yu, Jiahao Zhang, Wei Chen, Boyan Xu, and Keli Zhang. 2025. Dr.ECI: Infusing Large Language Models with Causal Knowledge for Decomposed Reasoning in Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Lingui...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Rui Cai, Xiaodong Zhang, and Houfeng Wang. 2016. Bidirectional Recurrent Convolutional Neural Network for Relation Classification. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) . 756–765

    2016

  11. [19]

    Lang Cao, Shihua Zhang, and Juxing Chen. 2021. CBCP: A Method of Causality Extraction from Unstructured Financial Text. In Proceedings of the 2021 5th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval (NLPIR ’21) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 135–140

    2021

  12. [20]

    Pengfei Cao, Xinyu Zuo, Yubo Chen, Kang Liu, Jun Zhao, Yuguang Chen, and Weihua Peng. 2021. Knowledge-Enriched Event Causality Identification via Latent Structure Induction Networks. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Tommaso Caselli and Piek Vossen. 2017. The Event StoryLine Corpus: A New Benchmark for Causal and Temporal Relation Extraction. In Proceedings of the Events and Stories in the News Workshop . 77–86

    2017

  14. [22]

    Syin Chan, Yun Niu, Alyssa Ang, and Christopher S. G. Khoo. 1999. A method for extracting causal knowledge from textual databases. Singapore Journal of Library & Information Management (1999), 48–63

    1999

  15. [23]

    Du-Seong Chang and Key-Sun Choi. 2005. Causal Relation Extraction Using Cue Phrase and Lexical Pair Probabilities. In Natural Language Processing – IJCNLP 2004 , Keh-Yih Su, Jun’ichi Tsujii, Jong-Hyeok Lee, and Oi Yee Kwong (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 61–70

    2005

  16. [24]

    Liang Chao, Wei Xiang, and Bang Wang. 2024. In-context Contrastive Learning for Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Yaser Al-Onaizan, Mohit Bansal, and Yun-Nung Chen (Eds.). Association for...

    2024

  17. [25]

    Dian Chen, Yixuan Cao, and Ping Luo. 2020. Pairwise Causality Structure: Towards Nested Causality Mining on Financial Statements. In Natural Language Processing and Chinese Computing (NLPCC 2020) (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 12430) . Springer, 725–737. First...

    2020

  18. [26]

    Meiqi Chen, Yixin Cao, Kunquan Deng, Mukai Li, Kun Wang, Jing Shao, and Yan Zhang. 2022. ERGO: Event Relational Graph Transformer for Document-level Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics . 2118–2128

    2022

  19. [27]

    Meiqi Chen, Yixin Cao, Yan Zhang, and Zhiwei Liu. 2023. CHEER: Centrality-aware High-order Event Reasoning Network for Document-level Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Pape...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Mingliang Chen, Wenzhong Yang, Fuyuan Wei, Qicai Dai, Mingjie Qiu, Chenghao Fu, and Mo Sha. 2024. Event causality identification via structure optimization and reinforcement learning. Knowledge-Based Systems 284 (Jan. 2024), 111256. Manuscript submitted to ACM A Survey of Even...

    2024

  21. [29]

    Pei Chen, Kang Liu, Yubo Chen, Taifeng Wang, and Jun Zhao. 2021. Probing into the Root: A Dataset for Reason Extraction of Structural Events from Financial Documents. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Siyuan Chen and Kezhi Mao. 2024. Explicit and implicit knowledge-enhanced model for event causality identification. Expert Systems with Applications 238 (March 2024), 122039

    2024

  23. [31]

    Felipe Montano-Campos, and Wlodek Zadrozny

    Victor Zitian Chen, J. Felipe Montano-Campos, and Wlodek Zadrozny. 2020. Causal Knowledge Extraction from Scholarly Papers in Social Sciences. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.08904 (June 2020). arXiv:2006.08904 [cs.CL] Submitted on 16 June 2020, 03:37:40 UTC (v1), 404 KB

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Yang Chen, Weibing Wan, Jimi Hu, Yuxuan Wang, and Bo Huang. 2022. Complex Causal Extraction of Fusion of Entity Location Sensing and Graph Attention Networks. Information 13, 8 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Fei Cheng and Yusuke Miyao. 2017. Classifying Temporal Relations by Bidirectional LSTM over Dependency Paths. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) . 1–6

    2017

  26. [34]

    Prafulla Kumar Choubey and Ruihong Huang. 2017. A Sequential Model for Classifying Temporal Relations between Intra-Sentence Events. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 1796–1802

    2017

  27. [35]

    Cynthia Cockburn. 2010. Gender Relations as Causal in Militarization and War. International Feminist Journal of Politics 12, 2 (2010), 139–157

    2010

  28. [36]

    Alexis Conneau, Kartikay Khandelwal, Naman Goyal, Vishrav Chaudhary, Guillaume Wenzek, Francisco Guzmán, Edouard Grave, Myle Ott, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2020. Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meetin...

    2020

  29. [37]

    Shiyao Cui, Jiawei Sheng, Xin Cong, Quangang Li, Tingwen Liu, and Jinqiao Shi. 2022. Event Causality Extraction with Event Argument Correlations. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics . 2300–2312

    2022

  30. [38]

    Rosen, Gerbrand Ceder, Kristin A

    John Dagdelen, Alexander Dunn, Sanghoon Lee, Nicholas Walker, Andrew S. Rosen, Gerbrand Ceder, Kristin A. Persson, and Anubhav Jain. 2024. Structured information extraction from scientific text with large language models. Nature Communications 15 (2024), 1418

    2024

  31. [39]

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human...

    2019

  32. [40]

    Ling Ding, Jianting Chen, Peng Du, and Yang Xiang. 2024. Event causality identification via graph contrast-based knowledge augmented networks. Information Sciences 656 (Jan. 2024), 119905

    2024

  33. [41]

    Silong Ding, Yingchi Mao, Yong Cheng, Tianfu Pang, Lijuan Shen, and Rongzhi Qi. 2023. ECIFF: Event Causality Identification based on Feature Fusion. In 2023 IEEE 35th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI) . 646–653

    2023

  34. [42]

    Quang Do, Yee Seng Chan, and Dan Roth. 2011. Minimally Supervised Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 294–303

    2011

  35. [43]

    Yang, Sameer S

    Son Doan, Elly W. Yang, Sameer S. Tilak, Peter W. Li, Daniel S. Zisook, and Manabu Torii. 2019. Extracting health-related causality from twitter messages using natural language processing. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 19 (2019), 79

    2019

  36. [44]

    Jesse Dunietz, Lori Levin, and Jaime Carbonell. 2017. The BECauSE Corpus 2.0: Annotating Causality and Overlapping Relations. In Proceedings of the 11th Linguistic Annotation Workshop. 95–104

    2017

  37. [45]

    Chuang Fan, Daoxing Liu, Libo Qin, Yue Zhang, and Ruifeng Xu. 2022. Towards Event-level Causal Relation Identification. In Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (Madrid, Spain). 1828–1833

    2022

  38. [46]

    Jinglong Gao, Xiao Ding, Zhongyang Li, Ting Liu, and Bing Qin. 2024. Event Causality Identification via Competitive-Cooperative Cognition Networks. Knowledge-Based Systems 300 (Sept. 2024), 112139

    2024

  39. [47]

    Jinglong Gao, Xiao Ding, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2023. Is ChatGPT a Good Causal Reasoner? A Comprehensive Evaluation. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 . 11111–11126

    2023

  40. [48]

    Lei Gao, Prafulla Kumar Choubey, and Ruihong Huang. 2019. Modeling Document-level Causal Structures for Event Causal Relation Identification. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Te...

    2019

  41. [49]

    Yumiao Gao, Yizhi Ren, Jiawei Rao, Zuohua Chen, Qisen Xi, Haoda Wang, Dong Wang, and Lifeng Yuan. 2023. Chinese Event Causality Identification Based on Retrieval Enhancement. In Natural Language Processing and Chinese Computing . 159–170

    2023

  42. [50]

    Rohit Girdhar and Deva Ramanan. 2020. CATER: A diagnostic dataset for Compositional Actions & TEmporal Reasoning. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations

    2020

  43. [51]

    Roxana Girju. 2003. Automatic Detection of Causal Relations for Question Answering. In Proceedings of the ACL 2003 Workshop on Multilingual Summarization and Question Answering. Association for Computational Linguistics, Sapporo, Japan, 76–83

    2003

  44. [52]

    Girju, B

    R. Girju, B. Beamer, A. Rozovskaya, A. Fister, and S. Bhat. 2010. A knowledge-rich approach to identifying semantic relations between nominals. Information Processing & Management 46, 5 (2010), 589–610

    2010

  45. [53]

    Moldovan

    Roxana Girju and Dan I. Moldovan. 2002. Text Mining for Causal Relations. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. 360–364

    2002

  46. [54]

    Roxana Girju, Preslav Nakov, Vivi Nastase, Stan Szpakowicz, Peter Turney, and Deniz Yuret. 2007. SemEval-2007 Task 04: Classification of Semantic Relations between Nominals. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations (SemEval-2007) . 13–18. Man...

    2007

  47. [55]

    Seethalakshmi Gopalakrishnan, Luciana Garbayo, and Wlodek Zadrozny. 2024. Causality extraction from medical text using Large Language Models (LLMs). arXiv:2407.10020 [cs.CL]

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Albert Gu and Tri Dao. 2024. Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spaces. In First Conference on Language Modeling

    2024

  49. [57]

    Saiping Guan, Xueqi Cheng, Long Bai, Fujun Zhang, Zixuan Li, Yutao Zeng, Xiaolong Jin, and Jiafeng Guo. 2023. What is Event Knowledge Graph: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 35, 7 (2023), 7569–7589

    2023

  50. [58]

    Richards, Rob Fergus, and Kenneth Marino

    Anthony GX-Chen, Dongyan Lin, Mandana Samiei, Doina Precup, Blake A. Richards, Rob Fergus, and Kenneth Marino. 2025. Language Agents Mirror Human Causal Reasoning Biases. How Can We Help Them Think Like Scientists? arXiv:2505.09614 [cs.AI]

    2025

  51. [59]

    Hamilton, Rex Ying, and Jure Leskovec

    William L. Hamilton, Rex Ying, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Long Beach, California, USA). 1025–1035

    2017

  52. [60]

    Chikara Hashimoto. 2019. Weakly Supervised Multilingual Causality Extraction from Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP) . 2988–2999

    2019

  53. [61]

    Zhitao He, Pengfei Cao, Zhuoran Jin, Yubo Chen, Kang Liu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Mengshu Sun, and Jun Zhao. 2024. Zero-Shot Cross-Lingual Document- Level Event Causality Identification with Heterogeneous Graph Contrastive Transfer Learning. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint Internatio...

    2024

  54. [62]

    Stefan Heindorf, Yan Scholten, Henning Wachsmuth, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, and Martin Potthast. 2020. CauseNet: Towards a Causality Graph Extracted from the Web. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (Virtual Event, Ire...

    2020

  55. [63]

    Iris Hendrickx, Su Nam Kim, Zornitsa Kozareva, Preslav Nakov, Diarmuid Ó Séaghdha, Sebastian Padó, Marco Pennacchiotti, Lorenza Romano, and Stan Szpakowicz. 2010. SemEval-2010 Task 8: Multi-Way Classification of Semantic Relations between Pairs of Nominals. In Proceedings of t...

    2010

  56. [64]

    Christopher Hidey and Kathy McKeown. 2016. Identifying Causal Relations Using Parallel Wikipedia Articles. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), Katrin Erk and Noah A. Smith (Eds.). Association for C...

    2016

  57. [65]

    Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long Short-Term Memory. Neural Computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735–1780

    1997

  58. [66]

    Jerrold Soh Tsin Howe. 2021. Causal Inference with Legal Texts. MIT Computational Law Report (dec 7 2021). https://law.mit.edu/pub/causalinferencewithlegaltexts

    2021

  59. [67]

    Rong Hu, Jun Li, Hongyu Liu, et al. 2025. Knowledge interaction graph guided prompting for event causality identification. Applied Intelligence 55 (2025), 159

    2025

  60. [68]

    Zhilei Hu, Zixuan Li, Xiaolong Jin, Long Bai, Saiping Guan, Jiafeng Guo, and Xueqi Cheng. 2023. Semantic Structure Enhanced Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) . 10901–10913

    2023

  61. [69]

    Peixin Huang, Xiang Zhao, Minghao Hu, Zhen Tan, and Weidong Xiao. 2024. Distill, Fuse, Pre-train: Towards Effective Event Causality Identification with Commonsense-Aware Pre-trained Model. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, ...

    2024

  62. [70]

    Musarrat Hussain, Fahad Ahmed Satti, Jamil Hussain, Taqdir Ali, Syed Imran Ali, Hafiz Syed Muhammad Bilal, Gwang Hoon Park, Sungyoung Lee, and TaeChoong Chung. 2021. A practical approach towards causality mining in clinical text using active transfer learning. Journal of Biome...

    2021

  63. [71]

    Hiroshi Ishii, Qiang Ma, and Masatoshi Yoshikawa. 2010. Causal Network Construction to Support Understanding of News. In 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences . 1–10

    2010

  64. [72]

    Hiroshi Ishii, Qiang Ma, and Masatoshi Yoshikawa. 2012. Incremental Construction of Causal Network from News Articles. Journal of Information Processing 20, 1 (2012), 207–215. Publisher: Information Processing Society of Japan

    2012

  65. [73]

    Ashwin Ittoo and Gosse Bouma. 2011. Extracting explicit and implicit causal relations from sparse, domain-specific texts. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Systems (Alicante, Spain). 52–63

    2011

  66. [74]

    Ashwin Ittoo and Gosse Bouma. 2013. Editorial: Minimally-supervised learning of domain-specific causal relations using an open-domain corpus as knowledge base. Data Knowl. Eng. 88 (Nov. 2013), 142–163

    2013

  67. [75]

    Ahsanul Kabir, AlJohara Almulhim, Xiao Luo, and Mohammad Al Hasan

    M. Ahsanul Kabir, AlJohara Almulhim, Xiao Luo, and Mohammad Al Hasan. 2022. Informative Causality Extraction from Medical Literature via Dependency-Tree–Based Patterns. Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research 6 (2022), 295–316

    2022

  68. [76]

    Kazuma Kadowaki, Ryu Iida, Kentaro Torisawa, Jong-Hoon Oh, and Julien Kloetzer. 2019. Event Causality Recognition Exploiting Multiple Annotators’ Judgments and Background Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and t...

    2019

  69. [77]

    Divyansh Kaushik, Eduard Hovy, and Zachary Lipton. 2020. Learning The Difference That Makes A Difference With Counterfactually-Augmented Data. In International Conference on Learning Representations . https://openreview.net/forum?id=Sklgs0NFvr

    2020

  70. [78]

    Daniel Khashabi, Yeganeh Kordi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2022. UnifiedQA-v2: Stronger Generalization via Broader Cross-Format Training. arXiv:2202.12359 [cs.CL]

    2022 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Vivek Khetan, Roshni Ramnani, Mayuresh Anand, Shubhashis Sengupta, and Andrew E. Fano. 2021. Causal BERT : Language models for causality detection between events expressed in text. arXiv:2012.05453 [cs.CL] Manuscript submitted to ACM A Survey of Event Causality Identification:...

    2021 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Christopher Khoo, Syin Chan, and Yun Niu. 2002. The Many Facets of the Cause-Effect Relation. InThe Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. 51–70

    2002

  73. [81]

    Christopher S. G. Khoo, Syin Chan, and Yun Niu. 2000. Extracting Causal Knowledge from a Medical Database Using Graphical Patterns. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics . 336–343

    2000

  74. [82]

    Christopher S. G. Khoo, Jaklin Kornfilt, Robert N. Oddy, and Sung Hyon Myaeng. 1998. Automatic Extraction of Cause-Effect Information from Newspaper Text Without Knowledge-based Inferencing. Literary and Linguistic Computing 13, 4 (12 1998), 177–186

    1998

  75. [83]

    Kipf and Max Welling

    Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling. 2017. Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks. arXiv:1609.02907

    2017 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Karin Kipper Schuler, Anna Korhonen, and Susan Brown. 2009. VerbNet overview, extensions, mappings and applications. InProceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Compani...

    2009

  77. [85]

    Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E. Hinton. 2017. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Commun. ACM 60, 6 (May 2017), 84–90

    2017

  78. [86]

    Emre Kıcıman, Robert Ness, Amit Sharma, and Chenhao Tan. 2024. Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality. arXiv:2305.00050 [cs.AI]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Viet Dac Lai, Amir Pouran Ben Veyseh, Minh Van Nguyen, Franck Dernoncourt, and Thien Huu Nguyen. 2022. MECI: A Multilingual Dataset for Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics . 2346–2356

    2022

  80. [88]

    Flynn, René Vidal, Austin Reiter, and Gregory D

    Colin Lea, Michael D. Flynn, René Vidal, Austin Reiter, and Gregory D. Hager. 2017. Temporal Convolutional Networks for Action Segmentation and Detection. In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) . 1003–1012

    2017

  81. [89]

    Alexandru Lecu, Adrian Groza, and Lezan Hawizy. 2024. Using LLMs and ontologies to extract causal relationships from medical abstracts.Procedia Computer Science 244 (2024), 443–452. 6th International Conference on AI in Computational Linguistics

    2024

  82. [90]

    Lei Lei, Xuguang Ren, Nigel Franciscus, Junhu Wang, and Bela Stantic. 2019. Event Prediction Based on Causality Reasoning. In Intelligent Information and Database Systems (ACIIDS 2019) (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 11431) . 165–176

    2019

  83. [91]

    Haoran Li, Qiang Gao, Hongmei Wu, and Li Huang. 2024. Advancing Event Causality Identification via Heuristic Semantic Dependency Inquiry Network. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Yaser Al-Onaizan, Mohit Bansal, and Yun...

    2024

  84. [92]

    Pengfei Li and Kezhi Mao. 2019. Knowledge-oriented convolutional neural network for causal relation extraction from natural language texts. Expert Systems with Applications 115 (2019), 512–523

    2019

  85. [93]

    Qian Li, Jianxin Li, Jiawei Sheng, Shiyao Cui, Jia Wu, Yiming Hei, Hao Peng, Shu Guo, Lihong Wang, Amin Beheshti, and Philip S. Yu. 2024. A Survey on Deep Learning Event Extraction: Approaches and Applications. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems 35, 5 (2...

    2024

  86. [94]

    Shunhang Li, Gang Zhou, Jing Chen, Yepeng Sun, Ningbo Huang, and Sisi Peng. 2025. Event-level supervised contrastive learning with back- translation augmentation for event causality identification. Neurocomputing 621 (2025), 129232

    2025

  87. [95]

    Zhongyang Li, Xiao Ding, Kuo Liao, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2021. CausalBERT: Injecting Causal Knowledge Into Pre-trained Models with Minimal Supervision. arXiv:2107.09852 [cs.CL]

    2021 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Cheng Liu, Wei Xiang, and Bang Wang. 2024. Identifying while Learning for Document Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) . 3815–3827

    2024

  89. [97]

    Jian Liu, Yubo Chen, and Jun Zhao. 2021. Knowledge enhanced event causality identification with mention masking generalizations. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Yokohama, Yokohama, Japan). Article 499, 7 pages

    2021

  90. [98]

    Jintao Liu, Zequn Zhang, Zhi Guo, Li Jin, Xiaoyu Li, Kaiwen Wei, and Xian Sun. 2023. KEPT: Knowledge Enhanced Prompt Tuning for event causality identification. Knowledge-Based Systems 259 (Jan. 2023), 110064

    2023

  91. [99]

    Kang Liu, Yubo Chen, Jian Liu, Xinyu Zuo, and Jun Zhao. 2020. Extracting Events and Their Relations from Texts: A Survey on Recent Research Progress and Challenges. AI Open 1 (2020), 22–39

    2020

  92. [100]

    Xin Liu, Wei Yang, Fei Wei, et al. 2024. Semantic aware enhanced event causality identification. Scientific Reports 14 (2024), 32078

    2024

  93. [101]

    Yang Liu, Xiaoxia Jiang, Wenzheng Zhao, Weiyi Ge, and Wei Hu. 2023. Dual Graph Convolutional Networks for Document-Level Event Causality Identification. In Web and Big Data. 114–128

    2023

  94. [102]

    Ya Liu, Jiachen Tian, Lan Zhang, Yibo Feng, and Hong Fang. 2021. A Survey on Event Relation Identification. In Knowledge Graph and Semantic Computing: Knowledge Graph and Cognitive Intelligence . 173–184

    2021

  95. [103]

    Ying Liu, Zhe Xue, Yawen Li, Xu Shao, Yu Zang, and Junjiang Wu. 2023. Dual Semantic Enhanced Event Causality Identification with Derivative Temporal Prompt. In 2023 5th International Conference on Data-driven Optimization of Complex Systems (DOCS) . 1–8

    2023

  96. [104]

    Zhenyu Liu, Baotian Hu, Zhenran Xu, and Min Zhang. 2023. PPAT: Progressive Graph Pairwise Attention Network for Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2023, 19th-25th August 2023, Mac...

    2023

  97. [105]

    Hongyuan Lu and Wai Lam. 2023. PCC: Paraphrasing with Bottom-k Sampling and Cyclic Learning for Curriculum Data Augmentation. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics , Andreas Vlachos and Isabelle Augenstei...

    2023

  98. [106]

    Zhu, Seung-won Hwang, and Zhongyuan Wang

    Zhiyi Luo, Yuchen Sha, Kenny Q. Zhu, Seung-won Hwang, and Zhongyuan Wang. 2016. Commonsense causal reasoning between short texts. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Cape Town, South Africa) (KR’16)....

    2016

  99. [107]

    Arun S. Maiya. 2022. CausalNLP: A Practical Toolkit for Causal Inference with Text. arXiv:2106.08043 [cs.CL]

    2022 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Hieu Man, Franck Dernoncourt, and Thien Huu Nguyen. 2024. Mastering Context-to-Label Representation Transformation for Event Causality Identification with Diffusion Models. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 38, 17 (March 2024), 18760–18768. Number: 17

    2024

  101. [109]

    Hieu Man, Chien Van Nguyen, Nghia Trung Ngo, Linh Ngo, Franck Dernoncourt, and Thien Huu Nguyen. 2024. Hierarchical Selection of Important Context for Generative Event Causality Identification with Optimal Transports. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference o...

    2024

  102. [110]

    Hieu Man, Minh Nguyen, and Thien Nguyen. 2022. Event Causality Identification via Generation of Important Context Words. In Proceedings of the 11th Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics . 323–330

    2022

  103. [111]

    Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, G.s Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space. Proceedings of Workshop at ICLR 2013 (01 2013)

    2013

  104. [112]

    George A. Miller. 1995. WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38, 11 (Nov. 1995), 39–41

    1995

  105. [113]

    Paramita Mirza. 2014. Extracting Temporal and Causal Relations between Events. In Proceedings of the ACL 2014 Student Research Workshop . 10–17

    2014

  106. [114]

    Paramita Mirza, Rachele Sprugnoli, Sara Tonelli, and Manuela Speranza. 2014. Annotating Causality in the TempEval-3 Corpus. In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Computational Approaches to Causality in Language (CAtoCL) . 10–19

    2014

  107. [115]

    Paramita Mirza and Sara Tonelli. 2014. An Analysis of Causality between Events and its Relation to Temporal Information. In Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers . 2097–2106

    2014

  108. [116]

    Paramita Mirza and Sara Tonelli. 2016. CATENA: CAusal and TEmporal relation extraction from NAtural language texts. In Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers . 64–75

    2016

  109. [117]

    Nasrin Mostafazadeh, Nathanael Chambers, Xiaodong He, Devi Parikh, Dhruv Batra, Lucy Vanderwende, Pushmeet Kohli, and James Allen. 2016. A Corpus and Cloze Evaluation for Deeper Understanding of Commonsense Stories. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American C...

    2016

  110. [118]

    Feiteng Mu and Wenjie Li. 2023. Enhancing Event Causality Identification with Counterfactual Reasoning. InProceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) . 967–975

    2023

  111. [119]

    Tapas Nayak, Soumya Sharma, Yash Butala, Koustuv Dasgupta, Pawan Goyal, and Niloy Ganguly. 2022. A Generative Approach for Financial Causality Extraction. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2022 (Virtual Event, Lyon, France) (WWW ’22). Association for Computing Mac...

    2022

  112. [120]

    Qiang Ning, Zhili Feng, Hao Wu, and Dan Roth. 2018. Joint Reasoning for Temporal and Causal Relations. InProceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , Iryna Gurevych and Yusuke Miyao (Eds.). Association for Co...

    2018

  113. [121]

    Vermunt, and Caspar J

    Rasoul Norouzi, Bennett Kleinberg, Jeroen K. Vermunt, and Caspar J. van Lissa. 2025. Capturing causal claims: A fine-tuned text mining model for extracting causal sentences from social science papers. Research Synthesis Methods 16, 1 (2025), 139–156

    2025

  114. [123]

    Tim O’Gorman, Kristin Wright-Bettner, and Martha Palmer. 2016. Richer Event Description: Integrating event coreference with temporal, causal and bridging annotation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Computing News Storylines (CNS 2016) . 47–56

    2016

  115. [124]

    Jong-Hoon Oh, Kentaro Torisawa, Chikara Hashimoto, Ryu Iida, Masahiro Tanaka, and Julien Kloetzer. 2016. A semi-supervised learning approach to why-question answering. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Phoenix, Arizona). 3022–3029

    2016

  116. [125]

    Van Valin

    Rainer Osswald and Robert D. Van Valin. 2014. FrameNet, Frame Structure, and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. In Frames and Concept Types: Applications in Language and Philosophy . 125–156

    2014

  117. [126]

    Partha Pakray and Alexander Gelbukh. 2014. An Open-Domain Cause-Effect Relation Detection from Paired Nominals. In Nature-Inspired Computation and Machine Learning , Alexander Gelbukh, Félix Castro Espinoza, and Sofía N. Galicia-Haro (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, ...

    2014

  118. [127]

    Judea Pearl. 2009. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference (2 ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    2009

  119. [128]

    Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation. InProceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) . 1532–1543

    2014

  120. [129]

    Edoardo Maria Ponti and Anna Korhonen. 2017. Event-Related Features in Feedforward Neural Networks Contribute to Identifying Causal Relations in Discourse. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Linking Models of Lexical, Sentential and Discourse-level Semantics , Michael Roth,...

    2017

  121. [130]

    Joshi, Livio Robaldo, and Bonnie L

    Rashmi Prasad, Eleni Miltsakaki, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Aravind K. Joshi, Livio Robaldo, and Bonnie L. Webber. 2007. The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0 Annotation Manual

    2007

  122. [131]

    Ruili Pu, Yang Li, Suge Wang, Deyu Li, Jianxing Zheng, and Jian Liao. 2023. Enhancing Event Causality Identification with Event Causal Label and Event Pair Interaction Graph. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 . 10314–10322. Manuscript submi...

    2023

  123. [132]

    Jiangnan Qiu, Liwei Xu, Jie Zhai, and Ling Luo. 2017. Extracting Causal Relations from Emergency Cases Based on Conditional Random Fields. Procedia Computer Science 112 (2017), 1623–1632. Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems: Proceedings of the 21s...

    2017

  124. [133]

    Kira Radinsky, Sagie Davidovich, and Shaul Markovitch. 2012. Learning causality for news events prediction. InProceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web (Lyon, France) (WWW ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 909–918

    2012

  125. [134]

    Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J. Liu. 2020. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 21, 1, Article 140 (Jan. 2020), 67 pages

    2020

  126. [135]

    Ines Rehbein and Josef Ruppenhofer. 2017. Catching the Common Cause: Extraction and Annotation of Causal Relations and their Participants. In Proceedings of the 11th Linguistic Annotation Workshop , Nathan Schneider and Nianwen Xue (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguis...

    2017

  127. [136]

    Mehwish Riaz and Roxana Girju. 2014. Recognizing Causality in Verb-Noun Pairs via Noun and Verb Semantics. In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Computational Approaches to Causality in Language (CAtoCL) , Oleksandr Kolomiyets, Marie-Francine Moens, Martha Palmer, James ...

    2014

  128. [137]

    Bryan Rink, Cosmin Adrian Bejan, and Sanda Harabagiu. 2010. Learning Textual Graph Patterns to Detect Causal Event Relations. InProceedings of the 23rd International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference (FLAIRS-23) (Daytona Beach, Florida, USA) (FLAIRS ’...

    2010

  129. [138]

    Wentao Yu Ruijuan Hu, Haiyan Liu. 2024. ERDAP: A Novel Method of Event Relation Data Augmentation Based on Relation Prediction. The International Arab Journal of Information Technology (IAJIT) 21, 01 (2024), 67– 74

    2024

  130. [139]

    Hiroki Sakaji and Kiyoshi Izumi. 2023. Financial Causality Extraction Based on Universal Dependencies and Clue Expressions. New Gen. Comput. 41, 4 (Oct. 2023), 839–857

    2023

  131. [140]

    Hiroki Sakaji and Kiyoshi Izumi. 2023. Financial Causality Extraction Based on Universal Dependencies and Clue Expressions. New Generation Computing 41 (2023), 839–857

    2023

  132. [141]

    Victor Sanh, Lysandre Debut, Julien Chaumond, and Thomas Wolf. 2020. DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter. arXiv:1910.01108 [cs.CL]

    2020 arXiv

  133. [142]

    Hannah Sansford, Nicholas Richardson, Hermina Petric Maretic, and Juba Nait Saada. 2024. GraphEval: A Knowledge-Graph Based LLM Hallucination Evaluation Framework. arXiv:2407.10793 [cs.CL]

    2024 arXiv

  134. [143]

    Smith, and Yejin Choi

    Maarten Sap, Ronan Le Bras, Emily Allaway, Chandra Bhagavatula, Nicholas Lourie, Hannah Rashkin, Brendan Roof, Noah A. Smith, and Yejin Choi. 2019. ATOMIC: An Atlas of Machine Commonsense for If-Then Reasoning. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 33, ...

    2019

  135. [144]

    Shirong Shen, Heng Zhou, Tongtong Wu, and Guilin Qi. 2022. Event Causality Identification via Derivative Prompt Joint Learning. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics . 2288–2299

    2022

  136. [145]

    Robyn Speer, Joshua Chin, and Catherine Havasi. 2018. ConceptNet 5.5: An Open Multilingual Graph of General Knowledge. arXiv:1612.03975 [cs.CL]

    2018 arXiv

  137. [146]

    Ya Su, Hu Zhang, Guangjun Zhang, Yujie Wang, Yue Fan, Ru Li, and Yuanlong Wang. 2025. Enhancing Event Causality Identification with LLM Knowledge and Concept-Level Event Relations. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics , Owen Rambow, ...

    2025

  138. [147]

    Zhengyan Sun, Xiaoqing Li, and Guangli Zhu. 2022. LeakGAN-Based Causality Extraction in the Financial Field. In Tenth International Conference on Applications and Techniques in Cyber Intelligence (ICATCI 2022) (Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies,...

    2022

  139. [148]

    Fiona Anting Tan, Ali Hürriyetoğlu, Tommaso Caselli, Nelleke Oostdijk, Tadashi Nomoto, Hansi Hettiarachchi, Iqra Ameer, Onur Uca, Farhana Fer- dousi Liza, and Tiancheng Hu. 2022. The Causal News Corpus: Annotating Causal Relations in Event Sentences from News. In Proceedings o...

    2022

  140. [149]

    Zhengwei Tao, Zhi Jin, Xiaoying Bai, Haiyan Zhao, Chengfeng Dou, Yongqiang Zhao, Fang Wang, and Chongyang Tao. 2023. SEAG: Structure-Aware Event Causality Generation. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 . 4631–4644

    2023

  141. [150]

    Minh Tran Phu and Thien Huu Nguyen. 2021. Graph Convolutional Networks for Event Causality Identification with Rich Document-level Structures. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language T...

    2021

  142. [151]

    Naushad UzZaman, Hector Llorens, Leon Derczynski, James Allen, Marc Verhagen, and James Pustejovsky. 2013. SemEval-2013 Task 1: TempEval-3: Evaluating Time Expressions, Events, and Temporal Relations. In Second Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (*SEM), Vo...

    2013

  143. [152]

    Niels van der Heijden, Helen Yannakoudakis, Pushkar Mishra, and Ekaterina Shutova. 2021. Multilingual and cross-lingual document classification: A meta-learning approach. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguis...

    2021

  144. [153]

    van Rijsbergen

    Cornelis J. van Rijsbergen. 1979. Information Retrieval. In Butterworth-Heinemann. Butterworths. Manuscript submitted to ACM 34 Cheng et al

    1979

  145. [154]

    Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Long Beach, California, ...

    2017

  146. [155]

    Petar Veličković, Guillem Cucurull, Arantxa Casanova, Adriana Romero, Pietro Liò, and Yoshua Bengio. 2018. Graph Attention Networks. arXiv:1710.10903

    2018 arXiv

  147. [156]

    Amir Pouran Ben Veyseh, Franck Dernoncourt, and Thien Huu Nguyen. 2023. Combining Heterogeneous Structures for Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Speech Communication Association . 3934–3938

    2023

  148. [157]

    Haoyu Wang, Fengze Liu, Jiayao Zhang, Dan Roth, and Kyle Richardson. 2024. Event Causality Identification with Synthetic Control. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Yaser Al-Onaizan, Mohit Bansal, and Yun-Nung Chen (Eds.)....

    2024

  149. [158]

    Shen Wang, Fei Cai, and Mengxi Zhang. 2024. Multilingual Event Causality Identification via Meta-learning with Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Generative Artificial Intelligence and Information Security . 18–23

    2024

  150. [159]

    Xiaozhi Wang, Yulin Chen, Ning Ding, Hao Peng, Zimu Wang, Yankai Lin, Xu Han, Lei Hou, Juanzi Li, Zhiyuan Liu, Peng Li, and Jie Zhou. 2022. MAVEN-ERE: A Unified Large-scale Dataset for Event Coreference, Temporal, Causal, and Subevent Relation Extraction. In Proceedings of the...

    2022

  151. [160]

    Xiaoyang Wang, Wenjie Luo, and Xiudan Yang. 2025. An Event Causality Identification Framework Using Ensemble Learning. Information 16, 1 (2025)

    2025

  152. [161]

    Do, Hongming Zhang, Jiayao Zhang, Weiqi Wang, Tianqing Fang, Yangqiu Song, Ginny Wong, and Simon See

    Zhaowei Wang, Quyet V. Do, Hongming Zhang, Jiayao Zhang, Weiqi Wang, Tianqing Fang, Yangqiu Song, Ginny Wong, and Simon See. 2023. COLA: Contextualized Commonsense Causal Reasoning from the Causal Inference Perspective. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Associat...

    2023

  153. [162]

    Zimu Wang, Lei Xia, Wei Wang, and Xinya Du. 2024. Document-level Causal Relation Extraction with Knowledge-guided Binary Question Answering. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024 , Yaser Al-Onaizan, Mohit Bansal, and Yun-Nung Chen (Eds.). Ass...

    2024

  154. [163]

    Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, et al. 2022. Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , Vol. 35. 24824–24837

    2022

  155. [164]

    Jason Wei and Kai Zou. 2019. EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Tasks. InProceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Pr...

    2019

  156. [165]

    Xiao Wei, Chenyang Huang, and Nengjun Zhu. 2024. Event causality extraction through external event knowledge learning and polyhedral word embedding. Machine Learning 113, 8 (Aug. 2024), 1–20

    2024

  157. [166]

    Chenxi Whitehouse, Monojit Choudhury, and Alham Fikri Aji. 2023. LLM-powered Data Augmentation for Enhanced Cross-lingual Performance. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 671–686

    2023

  158. [167]

    Graham Wilcock. 2009. Introduction to Linguistic Annotation and Text Analytics. In Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies . Morgan & Claypool, 1–99

    2009

  159. [168]

    Sifan Wu, Ruihui Zhao, Yefeng Zheng, Jian Pei, and Bang Liu. 2023. Identify Event Causality with Knowledge and Analogy. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 37, 11 (June 2023), 13745–13753. Number: 11

    2023

  160. [169]

    Wei Xiang, Cheng Liu, and Bang Wang. 2025. Modeling correlated causal-effect structure with a hypergraph for document-level event causality identification. Computer Speech & Language 90 (2025), 101752

    2025

  161. [170]

    Wei Xiang and Bang Wang. 2019. A Survey of Event Extraction From Text. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 173111–173137

    2019

  162. [171]

    Wei Xiang, Chuanhong Zhan, and Bang Wang. 2023. DAPrompt: Deterministic Assumption Prompt Learning for Event Causality Identification. CoRR abs/2307.09813 (2023). arXiv:2307.09813

    2023 arXiv

  163. [172]

    QunLi Xie, JunLan Pan, Tao Liu, BeiBei Qian, XianChuan Wang, and Xianchao Wang. 2022. A Survey of Event Relation Extraction. In Frontier Computing. 1818–1827

    2022

  164. [173]

    Kai Xiong, Xiao Ding, Zhongyang Li, Li Du, Ting Liu, Bing Qin, Yi Zheng, and Baoxing Huai. 2022. ReCo: Reliable Causal Chain Reasoning via Structural Causal Recurrent Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 6426–6438

    2022

  165. [174]

    Biao Xu and Guanci Yang. 2025. Interpretability research of deep learning: A literature survey. Information Fusion 115 (2025), 102721

    2025

  166. [175]

    Lilong Xue, Dan Zhang, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. 2024. AutoRE: Document-Level Relation Extraction with Large Language Models. InProceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 3: System Demonstrations) , Yixin Cao, Yang Feng, an...

    2024

  167. [176]

    Jie Yang, Soyeon Caren Han, and Josiah Poon. 2022. A survey on extraction of causal relations from natural language text. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 64, 5 (May 2022), 1161–1186

    2022

  168. [177]

    Xuefeng Yang and Kezhi Mao. 2014. Multi level causal relation identification using extended features. Expert Systems with Applications 41, 16 (2014), 7171–7181

    2014

  169. [178]

    Zhenyu Yang, Wei Liu, and Zongtian Liu. 2018. Event Causality Identification by Modeling Events and Relation Embedding. In Neural Information Processing. 59–68. Manuscript submitted to ACM A Survey of Event Causality Identification: Taxonomy, Challenges, Assessment, and Prospects 35

    2018

  170. [179]

    Maoxin Yin, Yuheng Chen, Huixun Qian, Haifeng Liu, and Junsheng Zhou. 2023. Enhancing Chinese Event Causality Identification with Supervised Contrastive Learning. In 2023 IEEE 9th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Intelligent Systems (CCIS) . 265–271

    2023

  171. [180]

    Changsen Yuan, Heyan Huang, Yixin Cao, and Yonggang Wen. 2023. Discriminative Reasoning with Sparse Event Representation for Document- level Event-Event Relation Extraction. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: L...

    2023

  172. [181]

    Seongjun Yun, Minbyul Jeong, Raehyun Kim, Jaewoo Kang, and Hyunwoo J Kim. 2019. Graph Transformer Networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 32

    2019

  173. [182]

    Zacks, Nicole K

    Jeffrey M. Zacks, Nicole K. Speer, Khena M. Swallow, Todd S. Braver, and Jeremy R. Reynolds. 2007. Event Perception: A Mind/Brain Perspective. Psychological Bulletin 133, 2 (March 2007), 273–293

    2007

  174. [183]

    Chuanqi Zang, Hanqing Wang, Mingtao Pei, and Wei Liang. 2023. Discovering the Real Association: Multimodal Causal Reasoning in Video Question Answering. In 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) . 19027–19036

    2023

  175. [184]

    Zefan Zeng, Qing Cheng, Xingchen Hu, Zhong Liu, Jingke Shen, and Yahao Zhang. 2024. Aligning the Representation of Knowledge Graph and Large Language Model for Causal Question Answering. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) . 1177–1186

    2024

  176. [185]

    Baiyan Zhang, Qin Chen, Jie Zhou, Jian Jin, and Liang He. 2024. Enhancing Event Causality Identification with Rationale and Structure-Aware Causal Question Answering. In 2024 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) . 1–8

    2024

  177. [186]

    Fu Zhang, Qi Miao, Jingwei Cheng, Hongsen Yu, Yi Yan, Xin Li, and Yongxue Wu. 2024. SRF: Enhancing Document-Level Relation Extraction with a Novel Secondary Reasoning Framework. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Yaser A...

    2024

  178. [187]

    Hang Zhang, Wenjun Ke, Jianwei Zhang, Zhizhao Luo, Hewen Ma, Zhen Luan, and Peng Wang. 2023. Prompt-based event relation identification with Constrained Prefix ATTention mechanism. Knowledge-Based Systems 281 (Dec. 2023), 111072

    2023

  179. [188]

    Shu Zhang, Dequan Zheng, Xinchen Hu, and Ming Yang. 2015. Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Networks for Relation Classification. In Proceedings of the 29th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation . 73–78

    2015

  180. [189]

    Weiwei Zhang, Linmei Hu, Yuting Wei, and Bin Wu. 2023. Verbalizer or Classifier? A New Prompt Learning Model for Event Causality Identification. In 2023 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) . 1–7

    2023

  181. [190]

    Xu-jie Zhang, Zong-tian Liu, Wei Liu, and Jian-feng Fu. 2012. Research on event-based semantic annotation of Chinese. In Proceedings of 2012 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Network Technology . 1883–1888

    2012

  182. [191]

    Kun Zhao, Donghong Ji, Fazhi He, Yijiang Liu, and Yafeng Ren. 2021. Document-level event causality identification via graph inference mechanism. Information Sciences 561 (June 2021), 115–129

    2021

  183. [192]

    Sendong Zhao. 2017. Mining Medical Causality for Diagnosis Assistance. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM ’17) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 841. Published: 02 February 2017

    2017

  184. [193]

    Sendong Zhao, Ting Liu, Sicheng Zhao, Yiheng Chen, and Jian-Yun Nie. 2016. Event causality extraction based on connectives analysis. Neurocom- puting 173 (2016), 1943–1950

    2016

  185. [195]

    Xiaoyan Zhao, Yang Deng, Min Yang, Lingzhi Wang, Rui Zhang, Hong Cheng, Wai Lam, Ying Shen, and Ruifeng Xu. 2024. A Comprehensive Survey on Relation Extraction: Recent Advances and New Frontiers. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 11, Article 293 (July 2024), 39 pages

    2024

  186. [196]

    Changmeng Zheng, Junhao Feng, Ze Fu, Yi Cai, Qing Li, and Tao Wang. 2021. Multimodal Relation Extraction with Efficient Graph Alignment. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia . 5298–5306

    2021

  187. [197]

    Changmeng Zheng, Zhiwei Wu, Junhao Feng, Ze Fu, and Yi Cai. 2021. MNRE: A Challenge Multimodal Dataset for Neural Relation Extraction with Visual Evidence in Social Media Posts. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) . 1–6

    2021

  188. [198]

    Enchang Zhu, Zhengtao Yu, Yuxin Huang, Shengxiang Gao, and Yantuan Xian. 2025. PTEKC: Pre-Training with Event Knowledge of ConceptNet for Cross-Lingual Event Causality Identification. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics 16 (2025), 1859–1872

    2025

  189. [199]

    Enchang Zhu, Zhengtao Yu, Yuxin Huang, Yantuan Xian, Yan Xiang, and Shuaishuai Zhou. 2023. Chinese-Vietnamese Cross-Lingual Event Causality Identification Based on Syntactic Graph Convolution. In Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision (PRCV 2023) (Lecture Notes in Computer Sc...

    2023

  190. [200]

    Liu Zhuang, Lin Wayne, Shi Ya, and Zhao Jun. 2021. A Robustly Optimized BERT Pre-training Approach with Post-training. In Proceedings of the 20th Chinese National Conference on Computational Linguistics . 1218–1227

    2021

  191. [201]

    Xinyu Zuo, Pengfei Cao, Yubo Chen, Kang Liu, Jun Zhao, Weihua Peng, and Yuguang Chen. 2021. Improving Event Causality Identification via Self-Supervised Representation Learning on External Causal Statement. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL-IJCNLP

    2021

  192. [202]

    Xinyu Zuo, Pengfei Cao, Yubo Chen, Kang Liu, Jun Zhao, Weihua Peng, and Yuguang Chen. 2021. LearnDA: Learnable Knowledge-Guided Data Augmentation for Event Causality Identification. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and ...

    2021

  193. [203]

    causality

    Xinyu Zuo, Yubo Chen, Kang Liu, and Jun Zhao. 2020. KnowDis: Knowledge Enhanced Data Augmentation for Event Causality Detection via Distant Supervision. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics . 1544–1550. Manuscript submitted to ACM 36...

    2020

  194. [2014]

    In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP)

    Modeling Biological Processes for Reading Comprehension. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). 1499–1510

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.