Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Improving negation detection with negation-focused pre-training

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 2205.04012 v1 pith:BAS3DNOC submitted 2022-05-09 cs.CL

Improving negation detection with negation-focused pre-training

classification cs.CL
keywords negationdetectionmodelscommonlanguagenegation-focusedpre-trainingtasks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Negation is a common linguistic feature that is crucial in many language understanding tasks, yet it remains a hard problem due to diversity in its expression in different types of text. Recent work has shown that state-of-the-art NLP models underperform on samples containing negation in various tasks, and that negation detection models do not transfer well across domains. We propose a new negation-focused pre-training strategy, involving targeted data augmentation and negation masking, to better incorporate negation information into language models. Extensive experiments on common benchmarks show that our proposed approach improves negation detection performance and generalizability over the strong baseline NegBERT (Khandewal and Sawant, 2020).

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Learning to Detect Cross-Modal Negation: An Analysis of Latent Representations and an Attention-Based Solution

    cs.AI 2026-07 reject novelty 4.0

    Negation is reported as a non-separable signal in standard VLM embeddings, cross-modal attention recovers up to +7% F1, and the paper claims visual negation depends on textual context.