Abstract
Most existing work on event extraction has focused on sentence-level textsand presumes the identification of a trigger-span -- a word or phrase in theinput that evokes the occurrence of an event of interest. Event arguments arethen extracted with respect to the trigger. Indeed, triggers are treated asintegral to, and trigger detection as an essential component of, eventextraction. In this paper, we provide the first investigation of the role oftriggers for the more difficult and much less studied task of document-levelevent extraction. We analyze their usefulness in multiple end-to-end andpipelined neural event extraction models for three document-level eventextraction datasets, measuring performance using triggers of varying quality(human-annotated, LLM-generated, keyword-based, and random). Our research showsthat trigger effectiveness varies based on the extraction task'scharacteristics and data quality, with basic, automatically-generated triggersserving as a viable alternative to human-annotated ones. Furthermore, providingdetailed event descriptions to the extraction model helps maintain robustperformance even when trigger quality degrades. Perhaps surprisingly, we alsofind that the mere existence of trigger input, even random ones, is importantfor prompt-based LLM approaches to the task.