Austria

Existing fairness benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) primarily focus on simple tasks, such as multiple-choice questions, overlooking biases that may arise in more complex scenarios like long-text generation. To address this gap, we introduce the Long Text Fairness Test (LTF-TEST), a framework that evaluates biases in LLMs through essay-style prompts. LTF-TEST covers 14 topics and 10 demographic axes, including gender and race, resulting in 11,948 samples. By assessing both model responses and the reasoning behind them, LTF-TEST uncovers subtle biases that are difficult to detect in simple responses. In our evaluation of five recent LLMs, including GPT-4o and LLaMA3, we identify two key patterns of bias. First, these models frequently favor certain demographic groups in their responses. Second, they show excessive sensitivity toward traditionally disadvantaged groups, often providing overly protective responses while neglecting others. To mitigate these biases, we propose REGARD-FT, a finetuning approach that pairs biased prompts with neutral responses. REGARD-FT reduces gender bias by 34.6% and improves performance by 1.4 percentage points on the BBQ benchmark, offering a promising approach to addressing biases in long-text generation tasks.

ACL 2025

Large Language Models Still Exhibit Bias in Long Text

long-form text generation

mitigation

fairness

benchmark

The AACL, Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, and the AFNLP, Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing, invite you to participate in the 1st Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (AACL) and the 10th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP).

A registration is required to access this event. Access to the event site will be granted to all registered attendees on **November 16th**. If you have not already done so, please register using the link below:
 
 https://conference.iis.sinica.edu.tw/servlet/Register?ConferenceID=411

Registration Is Required

IJCNLP-AACL 2022

The AACL, Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, and the AFNLP, Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing, invite you to participate in the 1st Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (AACL) and the 10th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP). 

poster

### 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)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated with specialized external tools, yet many tasks demand zero-shot tool usage with minimal or noisy documentation. Existing solutions rely on manual rewriting or labeled data for validation, making them inapplicable in true zero-shot settings. To address these challenges, we propose PLAY2PROMPT, an automated framework that systematically "plays" with each tool to explore its input-output behaviors. Through this iterative trial-and-error process, PLAY2PROMPT refines tool documentation and generates usage examples without any labeled data. These examples not only guide LLM inference but also serve as validation to further enhance tool utilization. Extensive experiments on real-world tasks demonstrate that PLAY2PROMPT significantly improves zero-shot tool performance across both open and closed models, offering a scalable and effective solution for domain-specific tool integration.

PLAY2PROMPT: Zero-shot Tool Instruction Optimization for LLM Agents via Tool Play

Large Language Models have garnered significant attention for their capabilities in multilingual natural language processing, while studies on risks associated with cross biases are limited to immediate context preferences. Cross-language disparities in reasoning-based recommendations remain largely unexplored, with a lack of even descriptive analysis. 
This study is the first to address this gap. 
We test LLM's applicability and capability in providing personalized advice across three key scenarios: university applications, travel, and relocation.
We investigate multilingual bias in state-of-the-art LLMs by analyzing their responses to decision-making tasks across multiple languages. 
We quantify bias in model-generated scores and assess the impact of demographic factors and reasoning strategies (e.g., Chain-of-Thought prompting) on bias patterns. 
Our findings reveal significant biases in both the scores and the reasoning structure of non-English languages. We also draw future implications for improving multilingual alignment in AI systems.

7 Points to Tsinghua but 10 Points to 清华? Assessing Large Language Models in Agentic Multilingual National Bias

Recent explainable metrics for image captioning aim to provide both scores and explanations for their evaluations. However, these metrics generate explanations without standardized criteria, and the overall quality of the generated explanations remains unverified. In this paper, we propose EXPERT, a reference-free evaluation metric that provides structured explanations based on three fundamental criteria: fluency, relevance, and descriptiveness. By constructing large-scale datasets of high-quality structured explanations, we develop a two-stage evaluation template to effectively supervise a vision-language model for both scoring and explanation generation. EXPERT achieves state-of-the-art results on benchmark datasets while providing significantly higher-quality explanations than existing metrics, as validated through comprehensive human evaluation.

EXPERT: An Explainable Image Captioning Evaluation Metric with Structured Explanations

Recent studies have demonstrated that large language models (LLMs) exhibit significant biases in evaluation tasks, particularly in preferentially rating and favoring self-generated content. However, the extent to which this bias manifests in fact-oriented tasks, especially within retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) frameworks—where keyword extraction and factual accuracy take precedence over stylistic elements—remains unclear. Our study addresses this knowledge gap by simulating two critical phases of the RAG framework. In the first phase, LLMs evaluated human-authored and model-generated passages, emulating the pointwise reranking phase. The second phase involves conducting pairwise reading comprehension tests to simulate the generation phase. Contrary to previous findings indicating a self-preference in rating tasks, our results reveal no significant self-preference effect in RAG frameworks. Instead, we observe that factual accuracy significantly influences LLMs’ output, even in the absence of prior knowledge. These findings are consistent among three common QA datasets (NQ, MARCO, TriviaQA Datasets) and 5 widely adopted language models (GPT-3.5, GPT-4o-mini, Gemini, LLaMA3, and Mistral). Our research contributes to the ongoing discourse on LLM biases and their implications for RAG-based system, offering insights that may inform the development of more robust and unbiased LLM systems.

LLMs are Biased Evaluators But Not Biased for Retrieval Augmented Generation

Non-verbal communication (NVC) is an integral part of human language, but it has been overlooked in natural language processing research. Studying NVC in general is challenging because of its high variance in interpretation among individuals and cultures, but mime---the theatrical technique of suggesting intent using only gesture, expression, and movement---is a subset of NVC with much lower human interpretation variance. As a gateway for evaluating vision-language models on their understanding of NVC, we propose Mime Identification-based Multimodal Evaluation (MIME), a gesture recognition task built upon a novel corpus of mimed activity comprising 86 unique gestures with a variety of perturbations applied to the avatar, background, and viewpoint for evaluating recognition robustness. We find that both open-weight and API-based vision-language models perform significantly worse than humans at identifying mimed gestures in MIME, motivating the need for increased research for instilling more robust understanding of human actions for VLMs.

Can Vision Language Models Understand Mimes?

Existing text revision systems are capable of generating fluent and coherent text, but struggle with constrained text revision (CTR), which requires adherence to specific constraints. Furthermore, adapting these systems to diverse constraints is challenging. To bridge this gap, we introduce TRIPS, a Text Revision agent via Iterative Planning and Searching, focusing on CTR. TRIPS utilizes a planner, a reviser (i.e., a large language model), and adaptable tools to generate revisions tailored to different scenarios. Specifically, we propose an iterative self-training alignment method to construct the planner, which generates tool usage and text revision plans. Furthermore, we propose Tool-Guided Monte Carlo Tree Search (TG-MCTS), a novel CTR algorithm that extends MCTS with tool-guided expansion and evaluation, enabling the search for optimal revision strategies across various scenarios. To evaluate TRIPS, we introduce ConsTRev, a dataset with multi-level constrained instructions for paragraph-level revision. Experimental results show that TRIPS outperforms baselines in both constraint adherence and revision quality. Furthermore, TRIPS exhibits robust performance across diverse use cases, including plain text and LaTeX revision.

A Constrained Text Revision Agent via Iterative Planning and Searching

A Writing Assistant (WA) is a system that offers writing suggestions based on user instructions. Existing WAs are typically built by training large language models (LLMs) on domain-specific instruction data through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) only. However, SFT optimizes models to match a single reference, failing to capture the inherent flexibility of text editing, where multiple valid revisions exist. Therefore, solely relying on SFT limits WA performance. To address this limitation, we propose the Rationalize and Align framework, which enhances the WA performance with rationale (i.e., linguistic explanations) and alignment. Our framework automatically generates the rationale and preference data for writing tasks via distillation and self-training, eliminating the need for human annotation. These data are then leveraged to refine WA using a novel preference optimization method. Empirical results show that our framework significantly improves WA performance. Our WA outperforms both open-source state-of-the-art WAs and the closed-source GPT-4o by 3.9 and 7.1 points on average, respectively, across eight well-established writing-related test sets.

Rationalize and Align: Enhancing Writing Assistance with Rationale via Self-Training for Improved Alignment

Due to the sensitive nature of personally identifiable information (PII), its owners may have the authority to control its inclusion or request its removal from large-language model (LLM) training. Beyond this, PII may be added or removed from training datasets due to evolving dataset curation techniques, because they were newly scraped for retraining, or because they were included in a new downstream fine-tuning stage. We find that the amount and ease of PII memorization is a dynamic property of a model that evolves throughout training pipelines and depends on commonly altered design choices. We characterize three such novel phenomena: (1) similar-appearing PII seen later in training can elicit memorization of earlier-seen sequences in what we call assisted memorization, and this is a significant factor (in our settings, up to 1/3); (2) adding PII can increase memorization of other PII; and (3) removing PII can lead to other PII being memorized.

Privacy Ripple Effects from Adding or Removing Personal Information in Language Model Training

Originally developed to reduce the manual burden of grading standardised language tests, Automated Essay Scoring (AES) research has long focused on holistic scoring methods which offer minimal formative feedback in the classroom. With the increasing demand for technological tools that support language acquisition, the field is turning to analytic AES (evaluating essays according to different linguistic traits). This approach holds promise for generating more detailed essay feedback, but relies on analytic scoring data that is both more cognitively demanding for humans to produce, and prone to bias. The dominant paradigm in AES is to aggregate disagreements between raters into a single gold-standard label, which fails to account for genuine examiner variability. In an attempt to make AES more representative and trustworthy, we propose to explore the sources of disagreements and lay out a novel AES system design that learns from individual raters instead of the gold standard labels.

Beyond the Gold Standard in Analytic Automated Essay Scoring

With the advent of highly capable instruction-tuned neural language models, benchmarking in natural language processing (NLP) is increasingly shifting towards pairwise comparison leaderboards, such as LMSYS Arena, from traditional global pointwise scores (e.g., GLUE, BIG-bench, SWE-bench). This paper empirically investigates the strengths and weaknesses of both global scores and pairwise comparisons to aid decision-making in selecting appropriate model evaluation strategies. Through computational experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets using standard global metrics and the popular Bradley–Terry model for pairwise comparisons, we found that while global scores provide more reliable overall rankings, they can underestimate strong models with rare, significant errors or low confidence. Conversely, pairwise comparisons are particularly effective for identifying strong contenders among models with lower global scores, especially where quality metrics are hard to define (e.g., text generation), though they require more comparisons to converge if ties are frequent.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

PLAY2PROMPT: Zero-shot Tool Instruction Optimization for LLM Agents via Tool Play

Similar lecture

Demographic-Aware Language Model Fine-tuning as a Bias Mitigation Technique