Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the effectiveness of different task formulations for emotion-cause pair extraction in conversation (ECPEC) using LLMs, revealing that pair-level judgement significantly outperforms dialogue-level generation across 18 controlled comparisons. The authors identify that many emotion-cause relations are better recognized when explicitly queried as pairs rather than generated in a broader dialogue context, achieving recognition rates between 92.7% and 98.1%. To enhance performance further, they introduce an auxiliary retriever that improves F1 scores by 0.50-1.46 points while only slightly increasing inference time, underscoring the importance of task decomposition in LLM applications for ECPEC.
Pair-level judgement in LLMs can extract emotion-cause relations with up to 98.1% accuracy, outperforming broader dialogue-level generation methods.
Emotion-cause pair extraction in conversation (ECPEC) identifies utterance pairs in which one utterance causes an emotion expressed in another. Recent LLM-based approaches formulate ECPEC at markedly different granularities, ranging from generating complete pair sets to judging individual candidate pairs. In this paper, we make the surprising observation that task formulation substantially affects performance, where pair-level judgement outperforms dialogue-level generation in all 18 controlled comparisons. We investigate the sources of this paradigm gap and find that many relations omitted by dialogue-level generation remain recognizable under explicit pair queries, under which the model recognizes 92.7%-98.1% of emotion-cause relations. This suggests that LLMs can recognize emotion-cause relations but struggle to discover and return complete pair sets. Pair-level judgement alleviates this burden, although its candidate rankings are more reliable than the binary decisions produced by a shared threshold. Based on this diagnosis, we introduce an auxiliary retriever that selectively re-examines ambiguous boundary cases, yielding consistent F1 improvements of 0.50-1.46 points across three datasets while maintaining an inference time of only 1.49x that of the baseline paradigm. These findings show that task decomposition and candidate scope are critical to effectively utilizing LLMs for ECPEC.
