Event Segmentation Applications in Large Language Model Enabled Automated Recall Assessments
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding how individuals perceive and recall information in their natural environments is critical to understanding potential failures in perception (e.g., sensory loss) and memory (e.g., dementia). Event segmentation, the process of identifying distinct events within dynamic environments, is central to how we perceive, encode, and recall experiences. This cognitive process not only influences moment-to-moment comprehension but also shapes event specific memory. Despite the importance of event segmentation and event memory, current research methodologies rely heavily on human judgements for assessing segmentation patterns and recall ability, which are subjective and time-consuming. A few approaches have been introduced to automate event segmentation and recall scoring, but validity with human responses and ease of implementation require further advancements. To address these concerns, we leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate event segmentation and assess recall, employing chat completion and text-embedding models, respectively. We validated these models against human annotations and determined that LLMs can accurately identify event boundaries, and that human event segmentation is more consistent with LLMs than among humans themselves. Using this framework, we advanced an automated approach for recall assessments which revealed semantic similarity between segmented narrative events and participant recall can estimate recall performance. Our findings demonstrate that LLMs can effectively simulate human segmentation patterns and provide recall evaluations that are a scalable alternative to manual scoring. This research opens novel avenues for studying the intersection between perception, memory, and cognitive impairment using methodologies driven by artificial intelligence.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 110 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2025.
Builds on
16 of 110 references.
References · 16
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
- 2022BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Modelcited by 1,968
- 2024DeepSeek-V2: A Strong, Economical, and Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Language Modelcited by 1,093
- 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 973
- 2023A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Modelscited by 639
- 2020Language-agnostic BERT Sentence Embeddingcited by 621
- 2022Estimating the Carbon Footprint of BLOOM, a 176B Parameter Language Modelcited by 264
- 2024Non-Determinism of "Deterministic" LLM Settingscited by 84
- 2023Unleashing the potential of prompt engineering for large language modelscited by 72
- 2023Aligning Large Language Models with Human Preferences through Representation Engineeringcited by 71
- 2024LLMs achieve adult human performance on higher-order theory of mind taskscited by 59
4 more
- 2023Comparing Llama-2 and GPT-3 LLMs for HPC kernels generationcited by 30
- 2024Limited Ability of LLMs to Simulate Human Psychological Behaviours: a Psychometric Analysiscited by 30
- 2024Behavior Alignment: A New Perspective of Evaluating LLM-based Conversational Recommender Systemscited by 11
- 2024Language Models Trained to do Arithmetic Predict Human Risky and Intertemporal Choicecited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.