Austria

Argumentation scheme mining is the task of automatically identifying reasoning mechanisms behind argument inferences. These mechanisms provide insights into underlying argument structures and guide the assessment of natural language arguments. Research on argumentation scheme mining, however, has always been limited by the scarcity of large enough publicly available corpora containing scheme annotations. In this paper, we present the first state-of-the-art results for mining argumentation schemes in natural language dialogue. For this purpose, we create QT-Schemes, a new corpus of 441 arguments annotated with 24 argumentation schemes. Using this corpus, we leverage the capabilities of LLMs and Transformer-based models, pre-training them on a large corpus containing textbook-like argumentation schemes and validating their applicability in real-world scenarios.

ACL 2025

Mining Complex Patterns of Argumentative Reasoning in Natural Language Dialogue

argumentation schemes

natural language reasoning

argument mining

### Welcome to The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025)

Message from the General Chair: 
*It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025), held in beautiful Vienna, Austria, from July 27 to August 1, 2025. ACL2025continues our field’s tradition of excellence in scholarship, innovation, and inclusivity, and I am deeply grateful to the many volunteers who have worked tirelessly to bring this event to life.* 
[Read more](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GI_hvOpjswAuYdUTromfeDiPpCcqidwg/view?usp=sharing)

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline - subject line "Welcome to ACL 2025". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. 

Welcome to The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025)

technical paper

Massive high-quality data, both pre-training raw texts and post-training annotations, have been carefully prepared to incubate advanced large language models (LLMs). In contrast, for information extraction (IE), pre-training data, such as BIO-tagged sequences, are hard to scale up. We show that IE models can act as free riders on LLM resources by reframing next-token \emph{prediction} into \emph{extraction} for tokens already present in the context. Specifically, our proposed next tokens extraction (NTE) paradigm learns a versatile IE model, \emph{Cuckoo}, with 102.6M extractive data converted from LLM's pre-training and post-training data. Under the few-shot setting, Cuckoo adapts effectively to traditional and complex instruction-following IE with better performance than existing pre-trained IE models. As a free rider, Cuckoo can naturally evolve with the ongoing advancements in LLM data preparation, benefiting from improvements in LLM training pipelines without additional manual effort.

Cuckoo: An IE Free Rider Hatched by Massive Nutrition in LLM’s Nest

Syntactic language models (SLMs) enhance Transformers by incorporating syntactic biases through the modeling of linearized syntactic parse trees alongside surface sentences. This paper focuses on compositional SLMs that are based on constituency parse trees and contain explicit bottom-up composition of constituent representations. We identify key aspects of design choices in existing compositional SLMs and propose a unified framework encompassing both existing models and novel variants. We conduct a comprehensive empirical evaluation of all the variants in our framework across language modeling, syntactic generalization, summarization, and inference efficiency. Based on the experimental results, we make multiple recommendations on the design of compositional SLMs. Our code is released at https://github.com/zhaoyd1/compositional_SLMs.

A Systematic Study of Compositional Syntactic Transformer Language Models

Current Large Language Models (LLMs) are predominantly designed with English as the primary language, and even the few that are multilingual tend to exhibit strong English-centric biases. Much like speakers who might produce awkward expressions when learning a second language, LLMs often generate unnatural outputs in non-English languages, reflecting English-centric patterns in both vocabulary and grammar. Despite the importance of this issue, the naturalness of multilingual LLM outputs has received limited attention. In this paper, we address this gap by introducing novel automatic corpus-level metrics to assess the lexical and syntactic naturalness of LLM outputs in a multilingual context. Using our new metrics, we evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs on a curated benchmark in French and Chinese, revealing a tendency towards English-influenced patterns. To mitigate this issue, we also propose a simple and effective alignment method to improve the naturalness of an LLM in a target language and domain, achieving consistent improvements in naturalness without compromising the performance on general-purpose benchmarks. Our work highlights the importance of developing multilingual metrics, resources and methods for the new wave of multilingual LLMs.

Do Large Language Models have an English Accent? Evaluating and Improving the Naturalness of Multilingual LLMs

In this paper, we show that knowledge distillation can be subverted to manipulate language model benchmark scores, revealing a critical vulnerability in current evaluation practices. We introduce "Data Laundering," a process that enables the covert transfer of benchmark-specific knowledge through seemingly legitimate intermediate training steps. Through extensive experiments with a 2-layer BERT student model, we show how this approach can achieve substantial improvements in benchmark accuracy (up to 75\% on GPQA) without developing genuine reasoning capabilities. Notably, this method can be exploited intentionally or even unintentionally, as researchers may inadvertently adopt this method and inflate scores without realising the implications. While our findings demonstrate the effectiveness of this technique, we present them as a cautionary tale highlighting the urgent need for more robust evaluation methods in AI. This work aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion about evaluation integrity in AI development and the need for benchmarks that more accurately reflect true model capabilities. The code is available at \url{https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/data_laundering}.

Data Laundering: Artificially Boosting Benchmark Results through Knowledge Distillation

People worldwide use language in subtle and complex ways to express emotions. Although emotion recognition--an umbrella term for several NLP tasks--impacts various applications within NLP and beyond, most work in this area has focused on high-resource languages. This has led to significant disparities in research efforts and proposed solutions, particularly for under-resourced languages, which often lack high-quality annotated datasets.
In this paper, we present BRIGHTER--a collection of multi-labeled, emotion-annotated datasets in 28 different languages and across several domains. BRIGHTER primarily covers low-resource languages from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America, with instances labeled by fluent speakers. We highlight the challenges related to the data collection and annotation processes, and then report experimental results for monolingual and crosslingual multi-label emotion identification, as well as emotion intensity recognition. We analyse the variability in performance across languages and text domains, both with and without the use of LLMs, and show that the BRIGHTER datasets represent a meaningful step towards addressing the gap in text-based emotion recognition.

BRIGHTER: BRIdging the Gap in Human-Annotated Textual Emotion Recognition Datasets for 28 Languages

The "LLM-as-an-annotator" and "LLM-as-a-judge" paradigms employ Large Language Models (LLMs) as annotators, judges, and evaluators in tasks traditionally performed by humans. LLM annotations are widely used, not only in NLP research but also in fields like medicine, psychology, and social science. Despite their role in shaping study results and insights, there is no standard or rigorous procedure to determine whether LLMs can replace human annotators. In this paper, we propose a novel statistical procedure, the Alternative Annotator Test (alt-test), that requires only a modest subset of annotated examples to justify using LLM annotations. Additionally, we introduce a versatile and interpretable measure for comparing LLM annotators and judges. To demonstrate our procedure, we curated a diverse collection of ten datasets, consisting of language and vision-language tasks, and conducted experiments with six LLMs and four prompting techniques. Our results show that LLMs can sometimes replace humans with closed-source LLMs (such as GPT-4o), outperforming the open-source LLMs we examine, and that prompting techniques yield judges of varying quality. We hope this study encourages more rigorous and reliable practices.

The Alternative Annotator Test for LLM-as-a-Judge: How to Statistically Justify Replacing Human Annotators with LLMs

Data contamination hinders fair LLM evaluation by introducing test data into newer models' training sets. Existing studies solve this challenge by updating benchmarks with newly collected data. However, they fail to guarantee contamination-free evaluation as the newly collected data may contain pre-existing knowledge, and their benchmark updates rely on intensive human labor. To address these issues, we in this paper propose AntiLeak-Bench, an automated anti-leakage benchmarking framework. Instead of simply using newly collected data, we construct samples with explicitly new knowledge absent from LLMs' training sets, which thus ensures strictly contamination-free evaluation. We further design a fully automated workflow to build and update our benchmark without human labor. This significantly reduces the cost of benchmark maintenance to accommodate emerging LLMs. Through extensive experiments, we highlight that data contamination likely exists before LLMs' cutoff time and demonstrate that AntiLeak-Bench effectively overcomes this challenge.

AntiLeakBench: Preventing Data Contamination by Automatically Constructing Benchmarks with Updated Real-World Knowledge

The rapid adoption of language models (LMs) across diverse applications has raised concerns about their factuality, i.e., their consistency with real-world facts. We introduce VERIFY, an evidence-based evaluation pipeline that measures LMs’ factuality in real-world user interactions. VERIFY considers the verifiability of LM-generated content and categorizes content units as Supported, Unsupported, or Undecidable based on Web-retrieved evidence. Importantly, factuality judgment by VERIFY more strongly correlates with human evaluations than existing methods. Using VERIFY, we identify “hallucination prompts,” i.e., those that frequently elicit factual errors in LM responses. These prompts form FactBench, a dataset of 1K prompts spanning 150 topics and tiered into Easy, Moderate, and Hard prompts. We benchmark widely-used openweight and proprietary LMs from six families, yielding three key findings: (i) LMs’ factual precision declines from Easy to Hard prompts, (ii) factuality does not necessarily improve with scale; Llama3.1-405B-Instruct performs comparably to or worse than its 70B variant, and (iii) Gemini1.5-Pro shows a notably higher refusal rate, with over-refusal in 25% of cases.

FactBench: A Dynamic Benchmark for In-the-Wild Language Model Factuality Evaluation

The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) has stimulated researchers to seek effective and efficient approaches to deal with LLM hallucinations and low-quality outputs. Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is a key element of machine learning applications in dealing with such challenges. However, research to date on UQ for LLMs has been fragmented in terms of techniques and evaluation methodologies. In this work, we address this issue by introducing a novel benchmark that implements a collection of state-of-the-art UQ baselines and offers an environment for controllable and consistent evaluation of novel UQ techniques over various text generation tasks. Our benchmark also supports the assessment of confidence normalization methods in terms of their ability to provide interpretable scores. Using our benchmark, we conduct a large-scale empirical investigation of UQ and normalization techniques across eleven tasks, identifying the most effective approaches.

Benchmarking Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Large Language Models with LM-Polygraph

Measuring the quality of responses generated by LLMs is a challenging task, particularly when it comes to evaluating whether the response is aligned with human preference. A novel approach involves using the LLM itself to make evaluation and stabilizing the results through multiple independent evaluations, similar to a single-layer narrow LLM network. This network consists of a fixed number of nodes, with each node being the same LLM. This paper draws upon the extensive research to explore whether wider and deeper networks can lead to fairer evaluations. Specifically, we first adaptively generate diverse node roles for each evaluation sample. Each perspective corresponds to the role of a specific LLM node in the first layer. In subsequent layers, we integrate the locally learned evaluation information from all nodes in the previous layer to obtain a more comprehensive evaluation result. Interestingly, this network design resembles the process of academic paper reviewing, where reviewers rate independently and then consider others’ opinions to reach a final decision. To validate the effectiveness, we construct the largest and most diverse evaluation benchmark LLMEval2 for LLM evaluators. Experimental results demonstrate that a wider network with 2 layers performs the best (named as BroadLLM).1 It also boosts Chinese LLM evaluation by 4.6×, saving 60% costs with 93% human agreement.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

Cuckoo: An IE Free Rider Hatched by Massive Nutrition in LLM’s Nest

Similar lecture

Can Large Language Models Understand Argument Schemes?