Lightweight Person-Place Relation Extraction from Historical Newspapers with Dependency Graphs and Proximity Features

The HIPE-2026 shared task introduces person-place relation extraction from multilingual historical newspapers as a new evaluation track, classifying the at and isAt relations between pre-annotated person and location mentions in English, French, and German. Motivated by the cost of processing historical archives at scale, our team (DS@GT HIPE, team 2 in the official results) investigates how far a lightweight, interpretable system can go without any pretrained language model at the relation classification stage. Our approach builds a document-level graph from dependency parses, extracts proximity-based and part-of-speech features for each entity pair, and classifies them with small scikit-learn ensembles or compact Graph Attention Networks, keeping every submitted run under 847K parameters. On the official evaluation (Test A, the newspaper test set), our best run reached a macro recall of 0.5142, ranking 3rd on the Efficiency profile while placing mid-table on Accuracy among the 17 participating teams. Two findings stand out. First, minimum character distance alone captures most of the classification signal; adding further engineered features yields inconsistent gains and sometimes degrades performance, echoing prior evidence that argument distance dominates relation extraction. Second, document-grouped cross-validation is essential on this corpus: pair-level splits inflate scores by 25-37 percentage points because entity mentions recur across documents, a data-leakage effect that grouped cross-validation removes.

Identifying and Mitigating Gender Cues in Academic Recommendation Letters: An Interpretability Case Study

Letters of recommendation (LoRs) can carry patterns of implicitly gendered language that can inadvertently influence downstream decisions, e.g. in hiring and admissions. In this work, we investigate the extent to which Transformer-based encoder models as well as Large Language Models (LLMs) can infer the gender of applicants in academic LoRs submitted to an U.S. medical-residency program after explicit identifiers like names and pronouns are de-gendered. While using three models (DistilBERT, RoBERTa, and Llama 2) to classify the gender of anonymized and de-gendered LoRs, significant gender leakage was observed as evident from up to 68% classification accuracy. Text interpretation methods, like TF-IDF and SHAP, demonstrate that certain linguistic patterns are strong proxies for gender, e.g. "emotional'' and "humanitarian'' are commonly associated with LoRs from female applicants. As an experiment in creating truly gender-neutral LoRs, these implicit gender cues were remove resulting in a drop of up to 5.5% accuracy and 2.7% macro $F_1$ score on re-training the classifiers. However, applicant gender prediction still remains better than chance. In this case study, our findings highlight that 1) LoRs contain gender-identifying cues that are hard to remove and may activate bias in decision-making and 2) while our technical framework may be a concrete step toward fairer academic and professional evaluations, future work is needed to interrogate the role that gender plays in LoR review. Taken together, our findings motivate upstream auditing of evaluative text in real-world academic letters of recommendation as a necessary complement to model-level fairness interventions.