India

Existing benchmarks evaluating biases in large language models (LLMs) primarily rely on explicit cues, declaring protected attributes like religion, race, gender by name. However, real-world interactions often contain implicit biases, inferred subtly through names, cultural cues, or traits. This critical oversight creates a significant blind spot in fairness evaluation. We introduce ImplicitBBQ, a benchmark extending the Bias Benchmark for QA (BBQ) with implicitly cued protected attributes across 6 categories. Our evaluation of GPT-4o on ImplicitBBQ illustrates troubling performance disparity from explicit BBQ prompts, with accuracy declining up to 7% in the &quot;sexual orientation&quot; subcategory and consistent decline located across most other categories. This indicates that current LLMs contain implicit biases undetected by explicit benchmarks. ImplicitBBQ offers a crucial tool for nuanced fairness evaluation in NLP.

IJCNLP-AACL 2025

“The dentist is an involved parent, the bartender is not”: Revealing Implicit Biases in QA with Implicit BBQ

data ethics

reflections and critiques

model bias/fairness evaluation

ethical considerations in nlp applications

transparency

### 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**. 

ACL 2025

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

Existing benchmarks evaluating biases in large language models (LLMs) primarily rely on explicit cues, declaring protected attributes like religion, race, gender by name. However, real-world interactions often contain implicit biases, inferred subtly through names, cultural cues, or traits. This critical oversight creates a significant blind spot in fairness evaluation. We introduce ImplicitBBQ, a benchmark extending the Bias Benchmark for QA (BBQ) with implicitly cued protected attributes across 6 categories. Our evaluation of GPT-4o on ImplicitBBQ illustrates troubling performance disparity from explicit BBQ prompts, with accuracy declining up to 7% in the "sexual orientation" subcategory and consistent decline located across most other categories. This indicates that current LLMs contain implicit biases undetected by explicit benchmarks. ImplicitBBQ offers a crucial tool for nuanced fairness evaluation in NLP.

workshop paper

### Welcome to IJCNLP-AACL 2025! 
 It is a great honor to host this joint conference in Mumbai, India, from December 20 to 24, 2025. The joint conferences of IJCNLP and AACL are organized with alternating leadership in the Asia-Pacific region. The event is run by the Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing (AFNLP) in odd years, and by AACL in even years, while it is organized solely by ACL when the annual ACL meeting is held in the region. This year, the conference is primarily organized by AFNLP. 
*Kentaro Inui
MBZUAI, UAE
General Chair, IJCNLP-AACL 2025* 
Read full message and download the Conference Handbook [**here**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UTwxkAqSqI-GAoJC3wE1zZt5VP1Y8GX0/view?usp=sharing).

The 14th IJCNLP & 4th AACL will be held in Mumbai, India from December 20th to December 24th, 2025.

This study explores the potential of a lightweight, open-source Large Language Model (LLM), demonstrating how its integration with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can support cost-effective evaluation of revision quality and writing style differentiation. By retrieving reference documents from a carefully chosen and constructed corpus of peer-reviewed conference proceedings, our framework leverages few-shot in-context learning to track manuscript revisions and venue-specific writing styles. We demonstrate that the LLM-based evaluation aligns closely with human revision histories—consistently recognizing quality improvements across revision stages and distinguishing writing styles associated with different conference venues. These findings highlight how a carefully designed evaluation framework, integrated with adequate, representative data, can advance automated assessment of scientific writing.

Between the Drafts: An Evaluation Framework for Identifying Quality Improvement and Stylistic Differences in Scientific Texts

Language corpora are the foundation of most natural language processing research, yet they often reproduce structural inequalities. One such inequality is gender discrimination in how actors are represented, which can distort analyses and perpetuate discriminatory outcomes. This paper introduces a user-centric, actor-level pipeline for detecting and mitigating gender discrimination in large-scale text corpora. By combining discourse-aware analysis with metrics for sentiment, syntactic agency, and quotation styles, our method enables both fine-grained auditing and exclusion-based balancing. Applied to the taz2024full corpus of German newspaper articles (1980–2024), the pipeline yields a more gender-balanced dataset while preserving core dynamics of the source material. Our findings show that structural asymmetries can be reduced through systematic filtering, though subtler biases in sentiment and framing remain. We release the tools and reports to support further research in discourse-based fairness auditing and equitable corpus construction.

Fair Play in the Newsroom: Actor-Based Filtering Gender Discrimination in Text Corpora

These findings reveal a presentation bias in LLM-based peer review and suggest the need for better methods to reduce such bias and support fairer automated evaluation.Code documentation plays a vital role in enhancing collaboration, maintainability, and comprehension throughout the software development lifecycle. This becomes especially critical in legacy codebases, where missing or outdated comments hinder effective debugging and onboarding. Among documentation types, inline comments are particularly valuable for conveying program logic and supporting code reuse. With the growing capabilities of large language models (LLMs), their application to tasks such as code understanding and summarization has gained significant attention in the NLP community. However, the specific task of generating high-quality inline code comments using LLMs remains relatively under-explored. In this work, we conduct a systematic evaluation of several state-of-the-art LLMs to assess their effectiveness in producing meaningful and context-aware inline documentation. To this end, we curate a dataset of well-documented code snippets and propose a fine-grained evaluation framework that assesses both the quality and sufficiency of generated comments at the statement level. We further investigate the impact of prompting strategies and offer a comparative analysis across a range of models, including large foundational LLMs to smaller, code-specialized variants, within the domain of inline code documentation. Our findings offer actionable insights that can guide the development of effective and scalable systems for automated inline code documentation.

Reliable Inline Code Documentation with LLMs: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Comment Quality and Coverage

The performance of large language models (LLMs) continues to improve, as reflected in rising scores on standard benchmarks. However, the lack of transparency around training data raises concerns about potential overlap with evaluation sets and the fairness of reported results. Although prior work has proposed methods for detecting data leakage, these approaches primarily focus on identifying outliers and have not been evaluated under controlled simulated leakage conditions. In this work, we compare existing leakage detection techniques, namely permutation and n-gram-based methods, under a continual pretraining setup that simulates real-world leakage scenarios, and additionally explore a lightweight method we call semi-half question. We further introduce two efficient extensions, permutation-R and permutation-Q. While semi-half offers a low-cost alternative, our analysis shows that the n-gram method consistently achieves the highest F1-Score, performing competitively with permutation-Q. We also refine these techniques to support instance-level detection and reduce computational overhead. Leveraging the best-performing method, we create cleaned versions of MMLU and HellaSwag, and re-evaluate several LLMs. Our findings present a practical path toward more reliable and transparent evaluations, and we recommend contamination checks as a standard practice before releasing benchmark results.

Simulating Training Data Leakage in Multiple-Choice Benchmarks for LLM Evaluation

Telecom domain 3GPP documents are replete with images containing sequence diagrams. Advances in Vision-Language Large Models (VLMs) have eased conversion of such images to machine-readable PlantUML (puml) formats. However, there is a gap in evaluation of such conversions - existing works do not compare puml scripts for various components. In this work, we propose performance metrics to measure the effectiveness of such conversions. A subset of sequence diagrams from 3GPP documents is chosen to be representative of domain-specific actual scenarios. We compare puml outputs from two VLMs - Claude Sonnet and GPT-4V - against manually created ground truth representations. We use version control tools to capture differences and introduce standard performance metrics to measure accuracies along various components: participant identification, message flow accuracy, sequence ordering, and grouping construct preservation. We demonstrate effectiveness of proposed metrics in quantifying conversion errors across various components. The results show that nodes, edges and messages are accurately captured. However, we observe that VLMs do not necessarily perform well on complex structures such as notes, box, groups. Our experiments and performance metrics indicates a need for better representation of these components in training data for fine-tuned VLMs.

Measuring Visual Understanding in Telecom domain: Performance Metrics for Image-to-UML conversion using VLMs

Several multilingual benchmark datasets have been developed in a semi-automatic manner in the recent past to measure progress and understand the state-of-the-art in the multilingual capabilities of Large Language Models (LLM). However, there is not a lot of attention paid to the quality of the datasets themselves, despite the existence of previous work in identifying errors in even fully human-annotated test sets. In this paper, we manually analyze recent multilingual evaluation sets in two languages -- French and Telugu, identifying several errors in the datasets during the process. We compare the performance difference across several LLMs with the original and revised versions of the datasets and identify large differences (almost 10% in some cases) in both languages. Based on these results, we argue that test sets should not be considered immutable and should be revisited, checked for correctness, and potentially versioned. We end with some recommendations for both the dataset creators as well as consumers on addressing the dataset quality issues.

Test Set Quality in Multilingual LLM Evaluation

This paper introduces Indian Financial Narrative Inference Tasks and Evaluations (InFiNITE), a comprehensive framework for analyzing India's financial narratives through three novel inference tasks. Firstly, we present multi-modal earnings call analysis by integrating transcripts, presentation visuals, and market indicators via the Multi-Modal Indian Earnings Calls (MiMIC) dataset, enabling holistic prediction of post-call stock movements. Secondly, our Budget-Assisted Sectoral Impact Ranking (BASIR) dataset aids in systematically decoding government fiscal narratives by classifying budget excerpts into 81 economic sectors and evaluating their post-announcement equity performance. Thirdly, we introduce Bharat IPO Rating (BIR) datasets to redefine Initial Public Offering (IPO) evaluation through prospectus analysis, classifying potential investments into four recommendation categories (Apply, May Apply, Neutral, Avoid). By unifying textual, visual, and quantitative modalities across corporate, governmental, and public investment domains, InFiNITE addresses critical gaps in Indian financial narrative analysis. The open source data sets of the framework, including earnings calls, union budgets, and IPO prospectuses, establish benchmark resources specific to India for computational economic research under permissive licenses. For investors, InFiNITE enables data-driven identification of capital allocation opportunities and IPO risks, while policymakers gain structured insights to assess Indian fiscal communication impacts. By releasing these datasets publicly, we aim to facilitate research in computational economics and financial text analysis, particularly for the Indian market.

InFiNITE (∞): Indian Financial Narrative Inference Tasks & Evaluations

LLM (large language model) users of hosted providers commonly notice that outputs can vary for the same inputs under settings expected to be deterministic. While it is difficult to get exact statistics, recent reports on specialty news sites and discussion boards suggest that among users in all communities, the majority of LLM usage today is through cloud-based APIs. Yet the questions of how pervasive non- determinism is, and how much it affects perfor- mance results, have not to our knowledge been systematically investigated. We apply five API- based LLMs configured to be deterministic to eight diverse tasks across 10 runs. Experiments reveal accuracy variations of up to 15% across runs, with a gap of up to 70% between best pos- sible performance and worst possible perfor- mance. No LLM consistently delivers the same outputs or accuracies, regardless of task. We speculate about the sources of non-determinism such as input buffer packing across multiple jobs. To better quantify our observations, we introduce metrics focused on quantifying de- terminism, TARr@N for the total agreement rate at N runs over raw output, and TARa@N for total agreement rate of parsed-out answers. Our code and data will be publicly available at https://github.com/Anonymous.

Non-Determinism of “Deterministic” LLM System Settings in Hosted Environments

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assist scientists across diverse workflows. A key challenge is generating high-quality figures from textual descriptions, often represented as TikZ programs that can be rendered as scientific images. Prior research has proposed a variety of datasets and modeling approaches for this task. However, existing datasets for Text-to-TikZ are too small and noisy to capture the complexity of TikZ, causing mismatches between text and rendered figures. Moreover, prior approaches rely solely on supervised fine-tuning (SFT), which does not expose the model to the rendered semantics of the figure, often resulting in errors such as looping, irrelevant content, and incorrect spatial relations. To address these issues, we construct DaTikZ-V4, a dataset more than four times larger and substantially higher in quality than DaTikZ-V3, enriched with LLM-generated figure descriptions. Using this dataset, we train TikZilla, a family of small open-source Qwen models (3B and 8B) with a two-stage pipeline of SFT followed by reinforcement learning (RL). For RL, we leverage an image encoder trained via inverse graphics to provide semantically faithful reward signals. Extensive human evaluations with over 1,000 judgments show that TikZilla improves by 1.5-2 points over its base models on a 5-point scale, surpasses GPT-4o by 0.5 points, and matches GPT-5 in the image-based evaluation, while operating at much smaller model sizes. Code, data, and models will be made available.

TikZilla: Scaling Text-to-TikZ with High-Quality Data and Reinforcement Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) show strong reasoning and text generation capabilities, prompting their use in scientific literature analysis, including novelty assessment. While evaluating novelty of scientific papers is crucial for peer review, it requires extensive knowledge of related work, something not all reviewers have.While recent work on LLM-assisted scientific literature analysis supports literature comparison, existing approaches offer limited transparency and lack mechanisms for result traceability via an information retrieval module. To address this gap, we introduce GraphMind, an easy-to-use interactive web tool designed to assist users in evaluating the novelty of scientific papers or drafted ideas. Specially, GraphMind enables users to capture the main structure of a scientific paper, explore related ideas through various perspectives, and assess novelty via providing verifiable contextual insights. GraphMind enables users to annotate key elements of a paper, explore related papers through various relationships, and assess novelty with contextual insight. This tool integrates external APIs such as arXiv and Semantic Scholar with LLMs to support annotation, extraction, retrieval and classification of papers. This combination provides users with a rich, structured view of a scientific idea's core contributions and its connections to existing work. GraphMind is available at https://oyarsa.github.io/graphmind and a demonstration video at https://youtu.be/wKbjQpSvwJg

Downloads

Next from IJCNLP-AACL 2025

Between the Drafts: An Evaluation Framework for Identifying Quality Improvement and Stylistic Differences in Scientific Texts

Similar lecture

Social Bias Benchmark for Generation: A Comparison of Generation and QA-Based Evaluations

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from IJCNLP-AACL 2025

Between the Drafts: An Evaluation Framework for Identifying Quality Improvement and Stylistic Differences in Scientific Texts

Similar lecture

Social Bias Benchmark for Generation: A Comparison of Generation and QA-Based Evaluations

Downloads