aiqbench analysis
This arXiv preprint asks whether generative language models beat encoder-only discriminative models at discourse parsing, a core NLP task. The answer is mixed: at matched parameter counts, discriminative parsers win, but much larger generative models sometimes close the gap, and generative models show a clear edge in segmenting text into elementary discourse units. Readers should treat the new RST-DT state-of-the-art claims as benchmark results on a single dataset, and weigh them against the substantial compute that the larger generative models require.
Worth Their Weights? Evaluating Generative Models for Discourse Parsing
arXiv:2610.17658v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) parsing has historically been dominated by discriminative models based on pretrained encoder-only language models. The recent availability of high-quality generative language models has made it unclear whether RST parsing is better approached as a generative task. In this work, we investigate whether generative language models are better at parsing RST than traditional discriminative ones. We find that at matched parameter counts, discriminative parsers perform much better than generative ones, though much larger generative models sometimes outperform them. Generative models hold a particular advantage in elementary discourse unit (EDU) segmentation, and we report new state-of-the-art results on the RST-DT benchmark in end-to-end parsing as well as segmentation.
Title:Worth Their Weights? Evaluating Generative Models for Discourse Parsing
Abstract:Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) parsing has historically been dominated by discriminative models based on pretrained encoder-only language models. The recent availability of high-quality generative language models has made it unclear whether RST parsing is better approached as a generative task. In this work, we investigate whether generative language models are better at parsing RST than traditional discriminative ones. We find that at matched parameter counts, discriminative parsers perform much better than generative ones, though much larger generative models sometimes outperform them. Generative models hold a particular advantage in elementary discourse unit (EDU) segmentation, and we report new state-of-the-art results on the RST-DT benchmark in end-to-end parsing as well as segmentation.
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2610.17658 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2610.17658v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17658 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 214 words
Related coverage

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · Oct 13, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 10, 2026

[AINews] AEF-1 standard emerges for Third Party Evaluators, as Xai, OpenAI, and Anthropic all cosign
Latent Space · Sep 15, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026