🔗 Who cites «Prompting for explanations improves Adversarial NLI. Is this true? \Yes\ it is \true\ because ıt weakens superficial cues\»

11 papers of our library cite it (of the 149,439 whose bibliographies we read) · 2 with a page here, the most cited first · ← back to «Prompting for explanations improves Adversarial NLI. Is this true? \Yes\ it is \true\ because ıt weakens superficial cues\»

1. Semantic Change Characterization with LLMs using RhetoricsProceedings for the International Workshop on Computational Approaches to Language ChangeJáder Martins Camboim de Sá, Jooyoung Lee, Marcos Da Silveira, et al.2026 · 3 citations
2. When Does Meaning Backfire? Investigating the Role of AMRs in NLIJoint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (*SEM)Junghyun Min, Xiulin Yang, Shira Wein2025

9 more papers of our library cite it; they have no page here yet.

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/kavumba-2023-prompting-explanations-improves-adversarial-nli/cited-by/