Authors: Gangani Ariyarathne, Isuru Ariyarathne, Greatness Emmanuel-King, Kate Lawal, Alexander C. Nwala
Organizations: Department of Data Science, William & Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, USA · Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA · Mason School of Business, William & Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
Local journalism is vital in democratic societies where it informs people about local issues like, school board elections, small businesses, local health services, etc. But mounting economic pressures have made it increasingly difficult for local news stations to report these issues, underscoring the need to identify the salient geographical locations covered in local news (geo-foci). In response, we propose a novel geo-foci model for labeling US local news articles with the geographic locations (i.e., the names of counties, cities, states, countries) central to their subject matter. First, we manually labeled US local news articles from all 50 states with four administrative division labels (local, state, national, and international) corresponding to their geo-foci, and none for articles without a geographic focus. Second, we extracted and disambiguated geographic locations from them using Large Language Models (LLMs), since local news often contains ambiguous geographic entities (e.g., Paris, Texas vs. Paris, France). LLMs outperformed all eight geographic entity disambiguation methods we evaluated. Third, we engineered a rich set of spatial-semantic features capturing the prominence, frequency, and contextual positions of geographic entities. Using these features, we trained a classifier to accurately (F1: 0.86) detect the geographic foci of US local news articles. Our model could be applied to assess shifts from local to national narratives, and more broadly, enable researchers to better study local media.
Figures & tables
Figure 1. Overview of our geo-focus level classification and geo-foci identification model (NLGF) Overview of our geo-focus level classification and geo-foci identification model (NLGF)
Category
Metric
Mordecai3
Edinburgh
Geoparsepy
Cliff
Gate Yodie
DBpedia
GPT-4o
LLaMA2-7b
Phi-3
GPE
Precision
0.595
0.356
0.292
0.375
0.425
0.381
0.902
0.784
0.765
Recall
0.611
0.727
0.824
0.857
0.607
0.640
1.000
1.000
0.949
F1
0.603
0.478
0.431
0.522
0.500
0.478
0.948
0.879
0.847
LOC
Precision
0.321
0.282
0.316
0.475
0.308
0.409
0.700
0.450
0.495
Recall
0.281
0.478
0.480
0.633
0.500
0.720
0.972
0.957
0.870
F1
0.300
0.355
0.381
0.543
0.381
0.522
0.813
0.613
0.632
Table 1. Geoparsers vs. LLMs on the Toponym Disambiguation Task. Bold text marks best models for Geoparsers and LLMs.
Geo-focus
NLGF
GPT-4o
Cliff-Clavin
level
Prec.
Rec.
F1
Prec.
Rec.
F1
Prec.
Rec.
F1
Local
0.85
0.88
0.87
0.62
0.74
0.67
0.43
0.58
0.49
State
0.88
0.87
0.88
0.78
0.69
0.73
0.61
0.26
0.37
National
0.83
0.89
0.86
0.81
0.60
0.69
0.64
0.77
0.70
Intl.
0.93
0.96
0.94
0.89
0.92
0.90
0.70
0.96
0.81
None
0.95
0.83
0.89
0.71
0.82
0.76
0.95
0.62
0.75
Table 2. NLGF vs. GPT-4o vs. Cliff-Clavin: Geo-focus level/Geo-foci prediction results.
Figure 2. Feature importance of NLGF. Feature importance of NLGF.
Figure 3. NLGF vs. GPT-4o vs. Cliff-Clavin: Geo-Focus Level Classification Confusion Matrices. NLGF vs. GPT-4o vs. Cliff-Clavin: Geo-Focus Level Classification Confusion Matrices.
Determining the geolocation of extreme climate events and disasters in texts is a common problem in climate impact and adaptation research. Named-entity recognition (NER) tools are typically used to identify a pool of toponyms that serve as candidate event locations. In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of three off-the-shelf NER tools, namely Flair, Spacy and Stanza. We describe and quantify differences between their outputs for German news articles and evaluate them extrinsically based on three methods to determine the country where events took place. We show how their contrasts are propagated into downstream tasks and can yield distinct decisions about a document's geographical focus, which, in turn, can impact conclusions about countries' prominence in German media.
Brielen Madureira, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Andreas Niekler
LeipzigLab - Climate Discourse, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany · Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany · Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany +1
Large language models can memorize competing locale-specific facts yet fail to select among them when the locale changes, defaulting instead to a single globally dominant answer. We formalize this as localized knowledge disambiguation and introduce LocalNewsQA, an 18,700-item English-news benchmark that pairs the same question across two locales and scores whether a model actually switches its answer when the locale changes. We also introduce MAPLE, a controlled family of decoder-only models pretrained with document-level geographic metadata (source URL, country, and continent) already present in the training corpus, and compare it to metadata-free controls trained on identical data with the same token budget, architecture, and optimization. In controlled experiments at 1B and 3B, with inference-time metadata fixed, pretraining with metadata in MAPLE produces measurable switching and improves accuracy on questions whose correct answer depends on locale. Ablations and external-benchmark evaluations further suggest that locale-conditioned prediction benefits from geographic provenance learned during pretraining and that these benefits strengthen at larger model sizes.
Cross-view geo-localization is commonly solved as an image retrieval problem, matching a ground-level image against a database of satellite tiles through a jointly trained embedding. Such models are accurate, but they need large paired supervision and cannot show what evidence supports a match. In this paper, we study a different question: how much of this task can be solved through language alone? We prompt a multimodal large language model (MLLM) to describe each ground panorama and each satellite tile as structured text, and localize by comparing these descriptions. No component is trained. We evaluate on 9,826 VIGOR pairs from four U.S. cities, in three settings. First, the descriptions are faithful but not discriminative. They agree closely across the two views, yet ranking the full pool by description similarity almost never returns the correct tile (0.39% Recall@1). Second, we narrow the pool to ten neighboring tiles, as a coarse prior would do. The same descriptions now become useful: an MLLM judge that scores structural consistency doubles random ranking and matches a strong lexical baseline. It also states which fields of the two descriptions agree and which conflict, which an embedding distance cannot do, and which we see as a step toward interpretable localization. Third, we place the judge on a trained visual retriever. On the queries it ranks wrongly, reranking from images works, while reranking from our descriptions does not (23.5% against 10.7% Recall@1). Scene structure survives the conversion into language, while the fine appearance detail needed to separate nearby places does not. Code and prompts are publicly available at https://github.com/AyeshAbuLehyeh/GeoLingual.
Ayesh Abu Lehyeh, Jay Hwasung Jung, Safwan Wshah
Department of Computer Science, University of Vermont