Causal Evidence Extraction and Triangulation in Crisis Reports using Large Language Models: A ReliefWeb-based Study

When Text and Numbers Disagree: Evidence Arbitration in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in settings where textual summaries, numerical observations, and external tool outputs may provide conflicting evidence. We study how LLMs arbitrate between such sources when they support opposing decisions. To do so, we introduce a controlled synthetic benchmark in which latent risk trajectories generate both numerical time series and natural language summaries, allowing us to construct conflicts where exactly one evidence source is aligned with the ground-truth label. This design lets us independently manipulate modality, temporal recency, source reliability, and evidence provenance. Across open-weight instruction-tuned models, we find that arbitration behaviour is systematic rather than random: models exhibit distinct text-versus-number preferences, follow temporal recency more consistently than explicit reliability cues, and can over-rely on external forecasts even when they conflict with direct contextual evidence. These results suggest that current LLMs often rely on heuristic arbitration strategies when integrating heterogeneous evidence, highlighting a failure mode for tool-augmented decision systems.

Mapping Latent Narrative Content Using LLMs: Essay on Economic Uncertainty Drivers

Mapping the Climate-Health Evidence Base (2007-2023): A Bibliometric, Statistical, and NLP Multi-Label Text Analysis of 22,695 Records

We analyzed a curated climate--health bibliographic corpus of 22,695 multi-labeled records from 2007--2023 to characterize growth, thematic concentration, and evolving methods. Annual publication counts rose sharply, with multiple change-points indicating phase-structured expansion; Negative Binomial models estimated roughly 10--11% year-over-year growth. Exposure--health co-occurrence departed strongly from independence, with canonical hazard--outcome dyads (e.g., extreme heat with heat-related impacts; floods/hurricanes with mental health) occurring far more often than expected even after accounting for marginal term popularity. A hierarchical logistic model for asthma-tagged records showed strong alignment with air-pollution-related exposures (including ozone and particulate matter) and relative under-representation of generic heat/temperature terms. Methodologically, modeling timescales shifted toward longer horizons over time, while at least one legacy method tag declined. Finally, we detected time- and geography-dependent annotation completeness, including decreased exposure-term coding in recent years, underscoring the need to model missingness when interpreting temporal trends.

EviMap: Evidence-Grounded Hierarchical Topic Maps for Exploring Unlabeled Corpora

Research teams and organizations often explore unfamiliar free-text collections, from survey comments and reviews to reports and domain documents, before labels, queries or coding schemes exist. At this stage, the first thematic map shapes what users notice, prioritize and carry into downstream analysis, so it should be trusted only insofar as it can be verified. Existing options force a trade-off between scale and verifiability. Qualitative coding preserves evidence but is slow. Search presupposes a query. Clustering and topic models scale but produce labels users must interpret. One-shot large language model (LLM) summaries are fluent yet difficult to reproduce or audit. We present EviMap, an interactive system providing researchers and practitioners with an auditable thematic overview of such corpora. Guided by model-generated context describing the corpus and hypothesized stakeholder concerns, EviMap extracts within-document evidence phrases and organizes them, rather than whole documents, into a three-level map of aspects, groups and fine-grained topics. Embedding-based clustering narrows the search space for finer semantic judgments by the LLM. Each node traces back to supporting phrase spans, so documents link to topics through evidence they contain and users can audit labels against the original text. Users can start from a top-level corpus map, drill into topics, inspect highlighted evidence in original documents, and combine two topics to find documents discussing both. We demonstrate this workflow across six heterogeneous corpora spanning 2,108 to 101,699 documents, with a comparison against flat and hierarchical LLM baselines. By grounding every label in verbatim source spans, EviMap makes a topic map not just readable, but verifiable. Code, demo video, and interactive dashboard are available at https://github.com/zhiyintan/EviMap.

Verifiable Disaster Storylines and Causal Knowledge Graphs: A Citation-Grounded Pipeline from Heterogeneous Humanitarian Sources

Effective humanitarian response depends on the rapid synthesis of heterogeneous, high-volume information sources - a task that routinely exceeds human analytical capacity in the critical early hours of a crisis. We present a pipeline that combines structured disaster records from EM-DAT with unstructured documents from ReliefWeb and the European Media Monitor (EMM) to produce source-grounded disaster storylines and causal knowledge graphs supporting situational awareness for responders and analysts. Using Retrieval-Augmented Generation, the pipeline extracts structured storylines - tabular event profiles covering 17 fields, from severity and key drivers to child-sensitive impact indicators - and constructs causal knowledge graphs where each node and edge is enriched with citation-grounded explanatory narratives, enabling full traceability back to primary sources. We evaluate the system on three diverse crisis use cases through a human evaluation involving 9 domain expert and 9 non-expert evaluators. Results confirm high retrieval precision, strong faithfulness of extracted causal relations, and a clear expert preference for citation-grounded components over ungrounded alternatives. The pipeline is designed to scale to the full EM-DAT catalogue, with the goal of publicly releasing a narrative-enriched version of the database.

ConstructCIE: A Dataset for Extracting Causal Information from Construction Accident Narratives

Construction accident narratives contain rich causal information, but the evidence is often implicit, long-span, and distributed. We introduce ConstructCIE, a manually annotated dataset for Causal Information Extraction from OSHA construction accident reports. The dataset uses a hierarchical schema for accident types, causal factors, sub-causal factors, and supporting evidence spans. We evaluate supervised sequence taggers and instruction-tuned LLMs in an end-to-end hierarchical extraction setting. Results show that most evaluated models achieve strong accident-type prediction and recover broad causal meaning but remain limited in precise span-level extraction. Joint Hierarchical Extraction generally achieves stronger exact and soft matching, while Individual Hierarchical Extraction sometimes achieves higher keyword F1. Error distributions vary by extraction strategy, but evidence-selection and span-boundary errors remain common. These findings show that reliable Causal Information Extraction for construction accidents requires stronger domain grounding and more accurate evidence extraction. The code and data can be found at https://github.com/lab-flair/ConstructCIE .