Papers › Are Large Language Models Robust Coreference Resolvers?

Are Large Language Models Robust Coreference Resolvers?

23 May 2023arXiv:2305.14489archive 2025-07-28

Nghia T. Le, Alan Ritter

Recent work on extending coreference resolution across domains and languages relies on annotated data in both the target domain and language. At the same time, pre-trained large language models (LMs) have been reported to exhibit strong zero- and few-shot learning abilities across a wide range of NLP tasks. However, prior work mostly studied this ability using artificial sentence-level datasets such as the Winograd Schema Challenge. In this paper, we assess the feasibility of prompt-based coreference resolution by evaluating instruction-tuned language models on difficult, linguistically-complex coreference benchmarks (e.g., CoNLL-2012). We show that prompting for coreference can outperform current unsupervised coreference systems, although this approach appears to be reliant on high-quality mention detectors. Further investigations reveal that instruction-tuned LMs generalize surprisingly well across domains, languages, and time periods; yet continued fine-tuning of neural models should still be preferred if small amounts of annotated examples are available.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

nle18/coref-llms officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Coreference ResolutionDomain AdaptationFew-Shot LearningSentenceZero-Shot Learningcoreference-resolution

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections