# When Do "More Contexts" Help with Sarcasm Recognition?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12469 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.12469/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Mar 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.05709/) (2020)
- [Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1301.3781/) (2013)
- [Aligning Books and Movies: Towards Story-like Visual Explanations by Watching Movies and Reading Books](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.06724/) (2015)
- [BERTweet: A pre-trained language model for English Tweets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.10200/) (2020)
- [Creating and Characterizing a Diverse Corpus of Sarcasm in Dialogue](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.05404/) (2017)
- [Modelling Context with User Embeddings for Sarcasm Detection in Social Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.00976/) (2016)
- [CASCADE: Contextual Sarcasm Detection in Online Discussion Forums](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.06413/) (2018)
- [Sarcasm SIGN: Interpreting Sarcasm with Sentiment Based Monolingual Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.06836/) (2017)
- [A Dual-Channel Framework for Sarcasm Recognition by Detecting Sentiment Conflict](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.03587/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Sarcasm recognition is challenging because it needs an understanding of the true intention, which is opposite to or different from the literal meaning of the words. Prior work has addressed this challenge by developing a series of methods that provide richer contexts, e.g., sentiment or cultural nuances, to models. While shown to be effective individually, no study has systematically evaluated their collective effectiveness. As a result, it remains unclear to what extent additional contexts can improve sarcasm recognition. In this work, we explore the improvements that existing methods bring by incorporating more contexts into a model. To this end, we develop a framework where we can integrate multiple contextual cues and test different approaches. In evaluation with four approaches on three sarcasm recognition benchmarks, we achieve existing state-of-the-art performances and also demonstrate the benefits of sequentially adding more contexts. We also identify inherent drawbacks of using more contexts, highlighting that in the pursuit of even better results, the model may need to adopt societal biases.