Commonsense Knowledge with Negation: A Resource to Enhance Negation Understanding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19921v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 19:00:28 GMT
• Title: Commonsense Knowledge with Negation: A Resource to Enhance Negation Understanding
• Abstract summary: Negation is a common and important semantic feature in natural language.<n>Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle when negation is involved in natural language understanding tasks.<n>We present a novel approach to automatically augment existing commonsense knowledge corpora with negation.
• Score: 17.1556206397938
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Negation is a common and important semantic feature in natural language, yet Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle when negation is involved in natural language understanding tasks. Commonsense knowledge, on the other hand, despite being a well-studied topic, lacks investigations involving negation. In this work, we show that commonsense knowledge with negation is challenging for models to understand. We present a novel approach to automatically augment existing commonsense knowledge corpora with negation, yielding two new corpora containing over 2M triples with if-then relations. In addition, pre-training LLMs on our corpora benefits negation understanding.

Related papers

• Understanding the Dilemma of Unlearning for Large Language Models [50.54260066313032]
  Unlearning seeks to remove specific knowledge from large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose unPact, an interpretable framework for unlearning via prompt attribution and contribution tracking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T12:15:19Z)
• Three Kinds of Negation in Knowledge and Their Mathematical Foundations [4.343358400426713]
  We examine and analyze the understanding and characteristics of negation in various fields such as philosophy, logic, and linguistics.<n>Based on the distinction between the concepts of contradiction and opposition, we propose that there are three different types of negation in knowledge from a conceptual perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T10:01:37Z)
• Vision-Language Models Do Not Understand Negation [50.27667000027403]
  NegBench is a benchmark designed to evaluate negation understanding across 18 task variations and $79$k examples.<n>We show that this approach can result in a 10% increase in recall on negated queries and a 28% boost in accuracy on multiple-choice questions with negated captions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-16T09:55:42Z)
• Paraphrasing in Affirmative Terms Improves Negation Understanding [9.818585902859363]
  Negation is a common linguistic phenomenon. We show improvements with CondaQA, a large corpus requiring reasoning with negation, and five natural language understanding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T17:30:03Z)
• Negation Triplet Extraction with Syntactic Dependency and Semantic Consistency [37.99421732397288]
  SSENE is built based on a generative pretrained language model (PLM) of-Decoder architecture with a multi-task learning framework. We have constructed a high-quality Chinese dataset NegComment based on the users' reviews from the real-world platform of Meituan.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T14:28:33Z)
• Revisiting subword tokenization: A case study on affixal negation in large language models [57.75279238091522]
  We measure the impact of affixal negation on modern English large language models (LLMs) We conduct experiments using LLMs with different subword tokenization methods. We show that models can, on the whole, reliably recognize the meaning of affixal negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T03:14:27Z)
• Language models are not naysayers: An analysis of language models on negation benchmarks [58.32362243122714]
  We evaluate the ability of current-generation auto-regressive language models to handle negation. We show that LLMs have several limitations including insensitivity to the presence of negation, an inability to capture the lexical semantics of negation, and a failure to reason under negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-14T01:16:37Z)
• We're Afraid Language Models Aren't Modeling Ambiguity [136.8068419824318]
  Managing ambiguity is a key part of human language understanding. We characterize ambiguity in a sentence by its effect on entailment relations with another sentence. We show that a multilabel NLI model can flag political claims in the wild that are misleading due to ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-27T17:57:58Z)
• CONDAQA: A Contrastive Reading Comprehension Dataset for Reasoning about Negation [21.56001677478673]
  We present the first English reading comprehension dataset which requires reasoning about the implications of negated statements in paragraphs. CONDAQA features 14,182 question-answer pairs with over 200 unique negation cues. The best performing model on CONDAQA (UnifiedQA-v2-3b) achieves only 42% on our consistency metric, well below human performance which is 81%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-01T06:10:26Z)
• Not another Negation Benchmark: The NaN-NLI Test Suite for Sub-clausal Negation [59.307534363825816]
  Negation is poorly captured by current language models, although the extent of this problem is not widely understood. We introduce a natural language inference (NLI) test suite to enable probing the capabilities of NLP methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T23:39:01Z)
• An Analysis of Negation in Natural Language Understanding Corpora [10.692655009160742]
  We show that popular corpora have few negations compared to general-purpose English. Experiments show that state-of-the-art transformers trained with these corpora obtain substantially worse results with instances that contain negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-16T20:31:53Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.