mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

KRISTEVA: Close Reading as a Novel Task for Benchmarking Interpretive Reasoning

arXiv 2505.09825 ↗First posted 14 May 2025cs.CLcited by 4

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Each year, tens of millions of essays are written and graded in college-level English courses. Students are asked to analyze literary and cultural texts through a process known as close reading, in which they gather textual details to formulate evidence-based arguments. Despite being viewed as a basis for critical thinking and widely adopted as a required element of university coursework, close reading has never been evaluated on large language models (LLMs), and multi-discipline benchmarks like MMLU do not include literature as a subject. To fill this gap, we present KRISTEVA, the first close reading benchmark for evaluating interpretive reasoning, consisting of 1331 multiple-choice questions adapted from classroom data. With KRISTEVA, we propose three progressively more difficult sets of tasks to approximate different elements of the close reading process, which we use to test how well LLMs may seem to understand and reason about literary works: 1) extracting stylistic features, 2) retrieving relevant contextual information from parametric knowledge, and 3) multi-hop reasoning between style and external contexts. Our baseline results find that, while state-of-the-art LLMs possess some college-level close reading competency (accuracy 49.7% - 69.7%), their performances still trail those of experienced human evaluators on 10 out of our 11 tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 31 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 May 2025.

Builds on

31 of 75 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Metaphor Understanding Challenge Dataset for LLMs18 Mar
  2. 2023Evaluating the Rationale Understanding of Critical Reasoning in Logical Reading Comprehension30 Nov

Other references · 29

  1. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  2. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
  3. 2023MMMU: A Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGIcited by 2,080
  4. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 903
  5. 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 571
  6. 2023CMMLU: Measuring massive multitask language understanding in Chinesecited by 449
  7. 2019Cosmos QA: Machine Reading Comprehension with Contextual Commonsense Reasoningcited by 285
  8. 2024To CoT or not to CoT? Chain-of-thought helps mainly on math and symbolic reasoningcited by 263
  9. 2020ReClor: A Reading Comprehension Dataset Requiring Logical Reasoningcited by 217
  10. 2017Constructing Datasets for Multi-hop Reading Comprehension Across Documentscited by 190
  11. 2024PutnamBench: Evaluating Neural Theorem-Provers on the Putnam Mathematical Competitioncited by 165
  12. 2019DREAM: A Challenge Dataset and Models for Dialogue-Based Reading Comprehensioncited by 156
17 more
  1. 2024LAB-Bench: Measuring Capabilities of Language Models for Biology Researchcited by 156
  2. 2023Speak, Memory: An Archaeology of Books Known to ChatGPT/GPT-4cited by 125
  3. 2024MathBench: Evaluating the Theory and Application Proficiency of LLMs with a Hierarchical Mathematics Benchmarkcited by 105
  4. 2022Do Androids Laugh at Electric Sheep? Humor "Understanding" Benchmarks from The New Yorker Caption Contestcited by 98
  5. 2022FLUTE: Figurative Language Understanding through Textual Explanationscited by 79
  6. 2016A Thorough Examination of the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Taskcited by 72
  7. 2024ChatMusician: Understanding and Generating Music Intrinsically with LLMcited by 68
  8. 2022Testing the Ability of Language Models to Interpret Figurative Languagecited by 67
  9. 2024PUB: A Pragmatics Understanding Benchmark for Assessing LLMs' Pragmatics Capabilitiescited by 59
  10. 2024Confabulation: The Surprising Value of Large Language Model Hallucinationscited by 43
  11. 2021It's not Rocket Science : Interpreting Figurative Language in Narrativescited by 39
  12. 2024CS-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Large Language Models towards Computer Science Masterycited by 30
  13. 2022RELIC: Retrieving Evidence for Literary Claimscited by 18
  14. 2024LLMs' Reading Comprehension Is Affected by Parametric Knowledge and Struggles with Hypothetical Statementscited by 12
  15. 2022MiQA: A Benchmark for Inference on Metaphorical Questionscited by 9
  16. 2023KoRC: Knowledge oriented Reading Comprehension Benchmark for Deep Text Understandingcited by 7
  17. 2023ConceptPsy:A Benchmark Suite with Conceptual Comprehensiveness in Psychologycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Literary Evidence Retrieval via Long-Context Language Models
  2. 2026What is Good? Extracting and Testing Implicit Theories of Literary Quality from LLM Reasoning Traces
  3. 2026From annotation to reasoning: Culture in language models
  4. 2024NovelQA: Benchmarking Question Answering on Documents Exceeding 200K Tokens
  5. 2025ScholarBench: A Bilingual Benchmark for Abstraction, Comprehension, and Reasoning Evaluation in Academic Contexts
  6. 2024DetectiveQA: Evaluating Long-Context Reasoning on Detective Novels
  7. 2025LongReason: A Synthetic Long-Context Reasoning Benchmark via Context Expansion
  8. 2026WildTrace: Benchmarking Natural Evidence Trails in Long-Context Reasoning