STSimone Teufel

Simone Teufel

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article

Previous Organizations / Institutes

The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years


Simone Teufel has a total of 33 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Can Language Models Rival Mathematics Students? Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning through Textual Manipulation and Human Experiments

    by Andrii Nikolaiev, Yiannos Stathopoulos, Simone Teufel

    In this paper we look at the ability of recent large language models (LLMs) at solving mathematical problems in combinatorics. We compare models LLaMA-2, LLaMA-3.1, GPT-4, and Mixtral against each other and against human pupils and undergraduates with prior experience in mathematical olympiads. To facilitate these comparisons we introduce the Combi-Puzzles dataset, which contains 125 problem variants based on 25 combinatorial reasoning problems. Each problem is presented in one of five distinct forms, created by systematically manipulating the problem statements through adversarial additions, numeric parameter changes, and linguistic obfuscation. Our variations preserve the mathematical core and are designed to measure the generalisability of LLM problem-solving abilities, while also increasing confidence that problems are submitted to LLMs in forms that have not been seen as training instances. We found that a model based on GPT-4 outperformed all other models in producing correct responses, and performed significantly better in the mathematical variation of the problems than humans. We also found that modifications to problem statements significantly impact the LLM's performance, while human performance remains unaffected.

  • Open Access

    TIARA 2.0: an interactive tool for annotating discourse structure and text improvement

    by Jan Wira Gotama Putra, Kana Matsumura, Simone Teufel, Takenobu Tokunaga

    Discourse structure annotation aims at analysing how discourse units (e.g. sentences or clauses) relate to each other and what roles they play in the overall discourse. Several annotation tools for discourse structure have been developed. However, they often only support specific annotation schemes, making their usage limited to new schemes. This article presents TIARA 2.0, an annotation tool for discourse structure and text improvement. Departing from our specific needs, we extend an existing tool to accommodate four levels of annotation: discourse structure, argumentative structure, sentence rearrangement and content alteration. The latter two are particularly unique compared to existing tools. TIARA is implemented on standard web technologies and can be easily customised. It deals with the visual complexity during the annotation process by systematically simplifying the layout and by offering interactive visualisation, including clutter-reducing features and dual-view display. TIARA’s text-view allows annotators to focus on the analysis of logical sequencing between sentences. The tree-view allows them to review their analysis in terms of the overall discourse structure. Apart from being an annotation tool, it is also designed to be useful for educational purposes in the teaching of argumentation; this gives it an edge over other existing tools.


  • Predicting the impact of scientific concepts using full‐text features

    by Kathy McKeown, Hal Daume, Snigdha Chaturvedi, John Paparrizos, Kapil Thadani, Pablo Barrio, Or Biran, Suvarna Bothe, Michael Collins, Kenneth R. Fleischmann, et al.

    New scientific concepts, interpreted broadly, are continuously introduced in the literature, but relatively few concepts have a long‐term impact on society. The identification of such concepts is a challenging prediction task that would help multiple parties—including researchers and the general public—focus their attention within the vast scientific literature. In this paper we present a system that predicts the future impact of a scientific concept, represented as a technical term, based on the information available from recently published research articles. We analyze the usefulness of rich features derived from the full text of the articles through a variety of approaches, including rhetorical sentence analysis, information extraction, and time‐series analysis. The results from two large‐scale experiments with 3.8 million full‐text articles and 48 million metadata records support the conclusion that full‐text features are significantly more useful for prediction than metadata‐only features and that the most accurate predictions result from combining the metadata and full‐text features. Surprisingly, these results hold even when the metadata features are available for a much larger number of documents than are available for the full‐text features.


  • Context‐based generic cross‐lingual retrieval of documents and automated summaries

    by Wai Lam, Ki Chan, Dragomir Radev, Horacio Saggion, Simone Teufel

    We develop a context‐based generic cross‐lingual retrieval model that can deal with different language pairs. Our model considers contexts in the query translation process. Contexts in the query as well as in the documents based on co‐occurrence statistics from different granularity of passages are exploited. We also investigate cross‐lingual retrieval of automatic generic summaries. We have implemented our model for two different cross‐lingual settings, namely, retrieving Chinese documents from English queries as well as retrieving English documents from Chinese queries. Extensive experiments have been conducted on a large‐scale parallel corpus enabling studies on retrieval performance for two different cross‐lingual settings of full‐length documents as well as automated summaries.


  • Open Access

    Evaluation challenges in large-scale document summarization

    by Dragomir R. Radev, Simone Teufel, Horacio Saggion, Wai Lam, John Blitzer, Hong Qi, Arda Çelebi, Danyu Liu, Elliott Drabek

    We present a large-scale meta evaluation of eight evaluation measures for both single-document and multi-document summarizers. To this end we built a corpus consisting of (a) 100 Million automatic summaries using six summarizers and baselines at ten summary lengths in both English and Chinese, (b) more than 10,000 manual abstracts and extracts, and (c) 200 Million automatic document and summary retrievals using 20 queries. We present both qualitative and quantitative results showing the strengths and draw-backs of all evaluation methods and how they rank the different summarizers.