They want to pretend not to understand: The Limits of Current LLMs in Interpreting Implicit Content of Political Discourse
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Implicit content plays a crucial role in political discourse, where speakers systematically employ pragmatic strategies such as implicatures and presuppositions to influence their audiences. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance in tasks requiring complex semantic and pragmatic understanding, highlighting their potential for detecting and explaining the meaning of implicit content. However, their ability to do this within political discourse remains largely underexplored. Leveraging, for the first time, the large IMPAQTS corpus, which comprises Italian political speeches with the annotation of manipulative implicit content, we propose methods to test the effectiveness of LLMs in this challenging problem. Through a multiple-choice task and an open-ended generation task, we demonstrate that all tested models struggle to interpret presuppositions and implicatures. We conclude that current LLMs lack the key pragmatic capabilities necessary for accurately interpreting highly implicit language, such as that found in political discourse. At the same time, we highlight promising trends and future directions for enhancing model performance. We release our data and code at https://github.com/WalterPaci/IMPAQTS-PID
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2025.
Builds on
12 of 38 references.
References · 12
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,224
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
- 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,164
- 2024LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Taskscited by 243
- 2024Aya Expanse: Combining Research Breakthroughs for a New Multilingual Frontiercited by 129
- 2020Are Natural Language Inference Models IMPPRESsive? Learning IMPlicature and PRESuppositioncited by 77
- 2022A fine-grained comparison of pragmatic language understanding in humans and language modelscited by 70
- 2024PUB: A Pragmatics Understanding Benchmark for Assessing LLMs' Pragmatics Capabilitiescited by 59
- 2022The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters for Implicature Resolution by LLMscited by 58
- 2023"Is the Pope Catholic?" Applying Chain-of-Thought Reasoning to Understanding Conversational Implicaturescited by 4
- 2024The Invalsi Benchmarks: measuring Linguistic and Mathematical understanding of Large Language Models in Italiancited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Indirect Question Answering in English, German and Bavarian: A Challenging Task for High- and Low-Resource Languages Alikecited by 1
- 2026How Hypocritical Is Your LLM judge? Listener-Speaker Asymmetries in the Pragmatic Competence of Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Agreement Between Large Language Models, Human Reviewers, and Authors in Evaluating STROBE Checklists for Observational Studies in Rheumatologycited by 0
- 2026How Hypocritical Is Your LLM judge? Listener-Speaker Asymmetries in the Pragmatic Competence of Large Language Models17 Apr 2026
- 2026Indirect Question Answering in English, German and Bavarian: A Challenging Task for High- and Low-Resource Languages Alike16 Mar 2026
- 2026Agreement Between Large Language Models, Human Reviewers, and Authors in Evaluating STROBE Checklists for Observational Studies in Rheumatology12 Mar 2026