Literary Evidence Retrieval via Long-Context Language Models

How well do modern long-context language models understand literary fiction?We explore this question via the task of literary evidence retrieval, repurposing the RELiC dataset of Thai et al. (2022) to construct a benchmark where the entire text of a primary source (e.g., The Great Gatsby) is provided to an LLM alongside literary criticism with a missing quotation from that work.This setting, in which the model must generate the missing quotation, mirrors the human process of literary analysis by requiring models to perform both global narrative reasoning and close textual examination.We curate a high-quality subset of 292 examples through extensive filtering and human verification.Our experiments show that recent reasoning models, such as GEMINI PRO 2.5 can exceed human expert performance (62.5% vs. 50% accuracy).In contrast, the best open-weight model achieves only 29.1% accuracy, highlighting a gap in interpretive reasoning.Despite their speed and apparent accuracy, even the strongest models struggle with nuanced literary signals and overgeneration, signaling open challenges for applying LLMs to literary analysis.We release our dataset and evaluation code to encourage future work in this direction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-short.29
Primary Topic
Topic Modeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Literary Evidence Retrieval via Long-Context Language Models

Katherine Thai, Mohit Iyyer
Topic Modeling
article

Literary Evidence Retrieval via Long-Context Language Models

Katherine Thai, Mohit Iyyer
article en

Abstract

How well do modern long-context language models understand literary fiction?We explore this question via the task of literary evidence retrieval, repurposing the RELiC dataset of Thai et al. (2022) to construct a benchmark where the entire text of a primary source (e.g., The Great Gatsby) is provided to an LLM alongside literary criticism with a missing quotation from that work.This setting, in which the model must generate the missing quotation, mirrors the human process of literary analysis by requiring models to perform both global narrative reasoning and close textual examination.We curate a high-quality subset of 292 examples through extensive filtering and human verification.Our experiments show that recent reasoning models, such as GEMINI PRO 2.5 can exceed human expert performance (62.5% vs. 50% accuracy).In contrast, the best open-weight model achieves only 29.1% accuracy, highlighting a gap in interpretive reasoning.Despite their speed and apparent accuracy, even the strongest models struggle with nuanced literary signals and overgeneration, signaling open challenges for applying LLMs to literary analysis.We release our dataset and evaluation code to encourage future work in this direction.

Amherst College (US), University of Massachusetts Amherst (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Topic Modeling
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.