Papers › SocialIQA: Commonsense Reasoning about Social Interactions
SocialIQA: Commonsense Reasoning about Social Interactions
Maarten Sap, Hannah Rashkin, Derek Chen, Ronan LeBras, Yejin Choi
We introduce Social IQa, the first largescale benchmark for commonsense reasoning about social situations. Social IQa contains 38,000 multiple choice questions for probing emotional and social intelligence in a variety of everyday situations (e.g., Q: "Jordan wanted to tell Tracy a secret, so Jordan leaned towards Tracy. Why did Jordan do this?" A: "Make sure no one else could hear"). Through crowdsourcing, we collect commonsense questions along with correct and incorrect answers about social interactions, using a new framework that mitigates stylistic artifacts in incorrect answers by asking workers to provide the right answer to a different but related question. Empirical results show that our benchmark is challenging for existing question-answering models based on pretrained language models, compared to human performance (>20% gap). Notably, we further establish Social IQa as a resource for transfer learning of commonsense knowledge, achieving state-of-the-art performance on multiple commonsense reasoning tasks (Winograd Schemas, COPA).
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="1904.09728")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 10 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 10 have no recorded run.
By repository: community (archive-listed): 10 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
10 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 10 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from clear-nus/llm-human-model. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
d64904c8e899cc6f · report
3eae9cd2bc0dc803 · report
94d3875543a29881 · report
74e6e524d6f72496 · report
f5e0055352d005b6 · report
34a3712826fa1956 · report
d83e26bf6dda6392 · report
0e521abe5f775f14 · report
af208036332d5f10 · report
19ada76f6fdeda7b · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coreference Resolution | Winograd Schema Challenge | BERT-SocialIQA 340M | Accuracy | 72.5 | #31 of 82 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Coreference Resolution | Winograd Schema Challenge | BERT-large 340M | Accuracy | 67 | #39 of 82 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | COPA | BERT-SocialIQA 340M | Accuracy | 83.4 | #34 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | COPA | BERT-large 340M | Accuracy | 80.8 | #36 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | SIQA | BERT-large 340M (fine-tuned) | Accuracy | 64.5 | #13 of 24 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | SIQA | BERT-base 110M (fine-tuned) | Accuracy | 63.1 | #14 of 24 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | SIQA | GPT-1 117M (fine-tuned) | Accuracy | 63 | #15 of 24 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | SIQA | Random chance baseline | Accuracy | 33.3 | #24 of 24 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
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