Do Large Language Models Perform Well on Comprehending Poetic Logic in Modern Chinese Poetry?
Authors: Tian Lan, Shanshan Wang, Zehua Duo, Jiang Li, Guanglai Gao, Derek F. Wong, Xiangdong Su
Organizations: Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University · NLP2CT Lab, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Macau · College of Computer Science, Inner Mongolia University
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved significant progress across a wide range of natural language processing (NLP) tasks, yet their ability to understand literary texts, particularly modern Chinese poetry, remains largely unexplored. The unique literary characteristics of modern Chinese poetry necessitate a distinct form of reasoning for effective comprehension. Unlike conventional texts that convey clear information, the unique "poetic logic" of modern Chinese poetry requires a holistic reasoning approach that goes beyond superficial semantic analysis to be understood. However, current evaluation paradigms largely ignore this critical dimension. To address this gap, we propose Peony, the first benchmark specifically designed for evaluating the poetic logic of modern Chinese poetry. We define poetic logic as four tasks across three levels, namely stanza, line, and imagery, and systematically evaluate and analyze six mainstream LLMs based on Peony. We evaluate these models under both non-thinking and thinking configurations. The experimental results reveal the limitations of current LLMs in understanding the poetic logic of modern Chinese poetry and validate the effectiveness and necessity of Peony. Our data and code will be available.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The overall structure of our proposed benchmark.
Figure 2: The distribution of the poems categorized by the number of stanzas and lines.
Metric
Value
Number of Poems
800
Number of lines
12,826
Average lines per Poem
16.03
Average Characters per line
10.23
Number of LIO
800 (800)
Number of STO
436 (436)
Table 1: Statistical information of the Peony benchmark. The actual number of questions is indicated in parentheses.
Category
Models
STO
LIO
IMF
SNI
Average
Non-thinking
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
47.02
49.31
66.08
37.21
49.91
DeepSeek-V4-Pro
45.96
51.00
72.93
42.12
53.01
GPT-5.1
39.08
43.25
69.44
36.14
46.98
Kimi-K2.5
52.38
63.00
75.25
48.93
59.89
GLM-5.1
49.54
56.12
68.98
42.20
54.21
Thinking
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
50.00
67.59
76.09
39.81
58.37
Table 2: Overall performance comparison of LLMs on the Peony benchmark (accuracy). Bold indicates the best performance and underline indicates the second best.
Category
Models
IMF PR
SNI PR
Non-thinking
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
51.27
11.62
DeepSeek-V4-Pro
59.95
12.50
GPT-5.1
56.60
8.88
Kimi-K2.5
62.50
18.62
GLM-5.1
54.89
13.12
Thinking
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
62.56
9.38
Table 3: PR for IMF and SNI tasks across different models. Bold indicates the best performance and underline indicates the second best.
Appendix figures & tables13 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Table 4: Prompt for Curating the Imagery Filling Task
Table 5: Prompt for Curating the Sentence Inference Task
Table 6: Prompt for Stanza Ordering (STO) Task
Table 7: Prompt for Sentence Ordering (LIO) Task
Table 8: Prompt for Imagery Filling (IMF) Task
Table 9: Prompt for Sentence Inference (SNI) Task
Task
Answers
A (%)
B (%)
C (%)
D (%)
IMF
695
27.5
25.0
23.5
24.0
SNI
2,424
25.4
24.1
25.7
24.7
LIO
800
23.6
25.9
26.0
24.5
STO
436
24.5
24.5
25.0
25.9
Overall
4,355
25.3
24.6
25.4
24.7
Appendix
Table 10: Distribution of correct answer positions.
Model
Original
STO1
STO2
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
47.02
47.71
46.56
GPT-5.1
39.08
39.45
39.68
Appendix
Table 11: STO accuracy under two random option permutations.
Benchmark
Poetry Type
#Tasks
Dataset Scale
Evaluation Target
CCPM (Li et al., 2021)
Classical
1
27,218 poems
Semantic matching
Hou et al. (2025)
Classical
1
2,918 poems
Theme classification
ChangAn (Li et al., 2026)
Classical
4
10K+ human-written + 20K+ AI-generated
LLM-generated poetry detection
Neo-Classic (Zhang et al., 2026)
Classical
5
1,406 poems (628 Shi + 778 Ci)
Linguistic-aesthetic reasoning
AIGenPoetry (Wang et al., 2025)
Modern
1
800 human-written + 41,600 LLM-generated
LLM-generated poetry detection
Peony
Modern
4
800 poems / 4,355 instances
Poetic-logic comprehension
Appendix
Table 12: Comparison with representative Chinese poetry benchmarks.
Top 20 Short Imagery Words
Top 20 Long Imagery Words
Rank
Imagery
Count
Rank
Imagery
Count
1
人 (Human)
245
1
自己 (Self)
145
2
爱 (Love)
90
2
天空 (Sky)
99
3
风 (Wind)
68
3
生命 (Life)
89
4
梦 (Dream)
46
4
雨水 (Rainwater)
80
5
水 (Water)
45
5
阳光 (Sunlight)
73
Appendix
Table 13: Top 20 high-frequency short and long imagery words in Peony.
Table 14: Experimental examples for different tasks. / represents a line break, // represents a stanza break.
Reader
IMF ( PR )
SNI ( PR )
LIO
STO
Avg.
Expert 1
94.12 (90)
70 (40)
40
80
71.03
Expert 2
47.06 (20)
16.67 (0)
60
60
45.93
Expert 3
82.35 (70)
30 (10)
50
30
48.09
Expert 4
58.82 (40)
36.67 (10)
50
20
41.37
Expert 5
76.47 (60)
36.67 (10)
80
10
50.79
Non-expert 1
70.59 (50)
30 (10)
60
40
50.15
Appendix
Table 15: Human performance. PR is shown in parentheses.
Table 16: An SNI case study illustrating cross-line poetic-logic errors.
Traditional automatic evaluation methods have been shown to be unsuitable for modern Chinese poetry because of the distinct nature of this literary genre. Human evaluation remains reliable, but is expensive and not applicable to large-scale data. In this paper, we propose Poller (Poetry LLM Evaluator), a novel method leveraging large language models (LLMs) to evaluate the poetry understanding task. Specifically, our method requires LLMs to play the role of a poem's author with detailed information, thereby emulating human evaluation and judgment by adopting the poet's perspective. We conducted comprehensive experiments on multiple LLMs, evaluating the interpretations of poems across eight specialized dimensions. Experimental results demonstrate that our method effectively reduces the evaluation error between LLMs and humans. Especially for specific dimension evaluation, Poller-based LLMs achieve a 94.55% and 89.53% error reduction for rhetorical techniques and defamiliarization, respectively, compared to baseline methods. These performances are unattainable by conventional LLM evaluation methods. Experimental results from multiple LLMs across various dimensions validate the efficacy of our method. This work bridges the gap between automated efficiency and human expertise, establishing a foundation for automated evaluation in poetry-related tasks.
Shanshan Wang, Derek F. Wong, Jingming Yao +1
NLP2CT Lab, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Macau · Department of Portuguese, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, University of Macau
Previous detection studies have shown that LLMs cannot be effectively used as detectors, but these studies have not addressed modern Chinese poetry. Moreover, no relevant research has explored the performance of LLMs in detecting modern Chinese poetry. This paper evaluates and enhances the performance of LLMs as detectors for modern Chinese poetry, and proposes an image-semantic guided poetry detection method. Compared with traditional detection approaches, our method innovatively incorporates images that reflect the content of the poetry. Through example-driven approaches, our method effectively integrates information such as meaning, imagery, and feeling from the image, then forms a complementary judgment with the poem text. Experimental results demonstrate that the LLM detectors based on our method outperform baseline detectors based on plain text, and even surpass the best-performing traditional detector, RoBERTa. The Gemini detector using our method achieves a Macro-F1 score of 85.65%, reaching the state-of-the-art level. The performance improvements of different LLM detectors on multiple LLMs-generated data prove the effectiveness of our method.
Shanshan Wang, Fengying Ye, Hanjia Lyu +6
Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Macau · University of Rochester · Sichuan University +1
ChatGPT has demonstrated remarkable capabilities on both poetry generation and translation, yet its ability to truly understand poetry remains unexplored. Previous poetry-related work merely analyzed experimental outcomes without addressing fundamental issues of comprehension. This paper introduces a comprehensive framework for evaluating ChatGPT's understanding of modern poetry. We collaborated with professional poets to evaluate ChatGPT's interpretation of modern Chinese poems by different poets along multiple dimensions. Evaluation results show that ChatGPT's interpretations align with the original poets' intents in over 73% of the cases. However, its understanding in certain dimensions, particularly in capturing poeticity, proved to be less satisfactory. These findings highlight the effectiveness and necessity of our proposed framework. This study not only evaluates ChatGPT's ability to understand modern poetry but also establishes a solid foundation for future research on LLMs and their application to poetry-related tasks.
Shanshan Wang, Derek F. Wong, Jingming Yao +1
NLP2CT Lab, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Macau · Department of Portuguese, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, University of Macau