Joel Mire

@joelmire.bsky.social

PhD student @ltiatcmu.bsky.social. he/him

Do you work across computational methods, social sciences, and the humanities? Submit to Text as Data 2026! 📄 One-page submissions 🔓 Non-archival ⏰ Due August 1 📍 October 5 @UCBerkeley tada2026.org

Bild

🚀 Apply to CMU LTI’s Summer 2026 “Language Technology for All” internship! 🎓 Open to pre‑doctoral students new to language tech (non‑CS backgrounds welcome). 🔬 12–14 weeks in‑person in Pittsburgh — travel + stipend paid. 💸 Deadline: Feb 20, 11:59pm ET. Apply → forms.gle/cUu8g6wb27Hs...

CMU LTI Summer 2026 Internship Program Application

We are looking for applicants for the Carnegie Mellon University Language Technology Institute's Summer 2026 "Language Technology for All" internship program. The main goal of this internship is to pr...

forms.gle

Reading social media stories evokes a wide range of contextual reader reactions—inferential, affective, evaluative—yet we lack methods to study these at scale. Excited to share our new paper that builds a framework for analyzing storytelling practices across online communities!

Screenshot of paper title and authors. 

Title: Social Story Frames: Contextual Reasoning about Narrative Intent and Reception
Authors: Joel Mire, Maria Antoniak, Steven R. Wilson, Zexin Ma, Achyutarama R. Ganti, Andrew Piper, Maarten Sap

Can LLMs accurately aggregate information over long, information-dense texts? Not yet… We introduce Oolong, a dataset of simple-to-verify information aggregation questions over long inputs. No model achieves >50% accuracy at 128K on Oolong!

Performance of a sweep of models on Oolong-synth and Oolong-real. Performance decreases with increasing context length, sometimes steeply.

10 years after the initial idea, Artificial Humanities is here! Thanks so much to all who have preordered it. I hope you enjoy reading it and find this research approach as generative as I do. More to come!

BildBild

When it comes to text prediction, where does one LM outperform another? If you've ever worked on LM evals, you know this question is a lot more complex than it seems. In our new #acl2025 paper, we developed a method to find fine-grained differences between LMs: 🧵1/9

Bild

🖋️ Curious how writing differs across (research) cultures? 🚩 Tired of “cultural” evals that don't consult people? We engaged with interdisciplinary researchers to identify & measure ✨cultural norms✨in scientific writing, and show that❗LLMs flatten them❗ 📜 arxiv.org/abs/2506.00784 [1/11]

An overview of the work “Research Borderlands: Analysing Writing Across Research Cultures” by Shaily Bhatt, Tal August, and Maria Antoniak. The overview describes that We  survey and interview interdisciplinary researchers (§3) to develop a framework of writing norms that vary across research cultures (§4) and operationalise them using computational metrics (§5). We then use this evaluation suite for two large-scale quantitative analyses: (a) surfacing variations in writing across 11 communities (§6); (b) evaluating the cultural competence of LLMs when adapting writing from one community to another (§7).

I’m thrilled to share RewardBench 2 📊— We created a new multi-domain reward model evaluation that is substantially harder than RewardBench, we trained and released 70 reward models, and we gained insights about reward modeling benchmarks and downstream performance!

Bild

I'm joining Wisconsin CS as an assistant professor in fall 2026!! There, I'll continue working on language models, computational social science, & responsible AI. 🌲🧀🚣🏻‍♀️ Apply to be my PhD student! Before then, I'll postdoc for a year in the NLP group at another UW 🏔️ in the Pacific Northwest

Wisconsin-Madison's tree-filled campus, next to a big shiny lake A computer render of the interior of the new computer science, information science, and statistics building. A staircase crosses an open atrium with visibility across multiple floors

When interacting with ChatGPT, have you wondered if they would ever "lie" to you? We found that under pressure, LLMs often choose deception. Our new #NAACL2025 paper, "AI-LIEDAR ," reveals models were truthful less than 50% of the time when faced with utility-truthfulness conflicts! 🤯 1/

Bild

I updated our 🔭StorySeeker demo. Aimed at beginners, it briefly walks through loading our model from Hugging Face, loading your own text dataset, predicting whether each text contains a story, and topic modeling and exploring the results. Runs in your browser, no installation needed! ↳

A bar plot comparing the storytelling rates for different topics in the example dataset of congressional speeches. There are often large differences between storytelling and non-storytelling for individual topics. For example, the topic whose top words read "NUM, years, service, great, state" has much more storytelling that non-storytelling.The top five congressional speeches for the topic "NUM, years, service, great state." All of the documents honor the lives of important people.

New work on multimodal framing! 💫 Some fun results: comparisons of the same frame when expressed in images vs texts. When the "crime" frame is expressed in the article text, there are more political words in the text, but when the frame is expressed in the article image, more police words.

Table 2 from the paper, showing results of the "Fightin' Words" algorithm to rank words by their association with image vs text frames. Results are shown for the "crime" and "quality of life" frames.Figure 13 from the paper showing scatter plots of the topic space (UMAP reduction of a 5k sample of the generated topic descriptions) with points highlighted if they were assigned the "political frame." The two plots display quite different distributions.
Arnav Arora@rnv.bsky.social · last yr.

🚨New pre-print 🚨 News articles often convey different things in text vs. image. Recent work in computational framing analysis has analysed the article text but the corresponding images in those articles have been overlooked. We propose multi-modal framing analysis of news: arxiv.org/abs/2503.20960