United States

Multi-agent systems utilizing large language models often assign authoritative roles to improve performance, yet the impact of authority bias on agent interactions remains underexplored. We present the first systematic analysis of role-based authority bias in free-form multi-agent evaluation using ChatEval. Applying French and Raven&#39;s power-based theory, we classify authoritative roles into legitimate, referent, and expert types and analyze their influence across 12-turn conversations. Experiments with GPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 reveal that Expert and Referent power roles exert stronger influence than Legitimate power roles. Crucially, authority bias emerges not through active conformity by general agents, but through authoritative roles consistently maintaining their positions while general agents demonstrate flexibility. Furthermore, authority influence requires clear position statements, as neutral responses fail to generate bias. These findings provide key insights for designing multi-agent frameworks with asymmetric interaction patterns.

ACL 2026

 Belief in Authority: Impact of Authority in Multi-Agent Evaluation Framework

Truth and Responsibility
“Truth and Responsibility” is a call to reimagine anthropology to meet the demands of the present moment. The imperative to bear witness, take action, and be held accountable to the truths we write and circulate invites us to reflect on our responsibility in reckoning with disciplinary histories, harms, and possibilities. To whom are we giving evidence and toward what ends? For whom are we writing? To whom are we accountable, and in what ways? We are thrilled to announce the theme of the 2021 AAA Annual Meeting to be held in Baltimore, MD: Truth and Responsibility.

Many consider anthropology to be a holistic social science dedicated to cross-cultural understanding as a way to reduce bigotry and more fully comprehend “what it means to be human.” Others push against this readily circulated origin story, arguing that “human” remains a highly contested, political category—evident as the presumed set of rights and protections associated with the “human” continue to be stripped away violently in the communities in which some of us live and work. Which violent histories and epistemologies must anthropologists take responsibility for in telling truth(s) about the discipline’s development? How do the dual histories of settler colonialism and slavery continue to influence anthropological thought and practices? In these political times, how can anthropologists throughout the globe work to secure a capacious, progressive vision of the human? How might movements for anti-racism, decoloniality, queer liberation, and healing such as #BlackLivesMatter, #ProtectMaunaKea, and #MeToo push a future anthropology out of the ashes of the anthropological past? Finally, what are the limits and possibilities of the anthropological imagination?

Across subfields, we find truths in patterns of human behavior, language, evolution, and cultural worlds. Industry-positioned anthropologists do this by extending the boundaries of the discipline not as an administrative solution to job shortages but as a source of intervention and knowledge production. Increasingly, anthropologists who make use of the scientific method question how status and identity help to decide which facts come to represent truth. How might quantitative researchers use our methods to identify patterned truths, and what responsibility do we hold in challenging conventional wisdom about these patterns? What responsibility do we have to both our colleagues and larger publics, to push toward increased transparency and ethical grounding in our data collection, analysis, and presentation?

Pedagogy is a key medium for the communication of anthropological truths. Which (and whose) truths are foregrounded in our curricula? What are the possibilities for a liberatory pedagogy in a precarious, “post-truth” era? Conferences, museums, organizing spaces, and classrooms are sites where pedagogy and various forms of communication can help us interrogate the performativity of truth. How might anthropologists conceive of truth performances? Might visual, aural, and choreographic performances during AAA sessions offer anthropologists alternative genres for truth-telling and truth-making that provoke discussions about responsibility?

In accordance with the urgency of the year’s theme, the questions posed in this call for papers do not have easy answers. The hope is that those who submit proposals will take up these questions and engage in collective thinking and imagining about the truths we hold, the truths we challenge, and the responsibilities we bear in co-creating a free and more equitable world. All panel proposals should have a statement about how the panel has incorporated the goals of equity, diversity, and inclusion, and/or analysis of power.

Executive Session proposals have already been selected and speak directly to the theme “Truth and Responsibility.” To practice the critical reflexivity this call for papers invites, we asked that Executive Session submissions explicitly address the diversity of session participants, such as organizational/institutional affiliation, career stage, race, ethnicity, disability, sexuality, class, religion, national identity, and gender. Proposals for Executive Sessions that demonstrated a commitment to equity and inclusion and/or a clear analysis of power (i.e. anti-imperialist, anti-white supremacist, decolonial, anti-ableist, feminist, anti-transphobic, anti-xenophobic, etc) were given priority. We are excited to be in conversation with residents of the Baltimore region and look forward to the discussions, performances, and actions generated by the dynamic group of anthropologists attending the 2021 AAA Annual Meeting.

AAA Annual Meeting 2021

“Truth and Responsibility” is a call to reimagine anthropology to meet the demands of the present moment. The imperative to bear witness, take action, and be held accountable to the truths we write and circulate invites us to reflect on our responsibility in reckoning with disciplinary histories, harms, and possibilities. To whom are we giving evidence and toward what ends? For whom are we writing? To whom are we accountable, and in what ways? We are thrilled to announce the theme of the 2021 AAA Annual Meeting to be held in Baltimore, MD: Truth and Responsibility.

Multi-agent systems utilizing large language models often assign authoritative roles to improve performance, yet the impact of authority bias on agent interactions remains underexplored. We present the first systematic analysis of role-based authority bias in free-form multi-agent evaluation using ChatEval. Applying French and Raven's power-based theory, we classify authoritative roles into legitimate, referent, and expert types and analyze their influence across 12-turn conversations. Experiments with GPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 reveal that Expert and Referent power roles exert stronger influence than Legitimate power roles. Crucially, authority bias emerges not through active conformity by general agents, but through authoritative roles consistently maintaining their positions while general agents demonstrate flexibility. Furthermore, authority influence requires clear position statements, as neutral responses fail to generate bias. These findings provide key insights for designing multi-agent frameworks with asymmetric interaction patterns.

poster

It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026), held in San Diego, California, USA, July 2–7, 2026. ACL 2026 continues our fields 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.

It is exciting to see the many developments in the field reflected at our conference, such as the advancement of large language models (born out of our community) into many application directions. This is not without challenges, partly due to unsolved problems, and partly due to misuse of the technology. All this is reflected well at ACL 2026. The conference also reflects that the field is not only about advancing technology, but also the science of fundamentally understanding language and how it is use by many different speaker communities. <br>
[Full Message from General Chair Philipp Koehn](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing) <br><br><br>
<html><button style="display: inline-flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; white-space: nowrap; border-radius: 9999px; font-weight: bold; background: #7c3aed; color: white; font-family: 'Space Grotesk', sans-serif; height: 40px; font-size: 16px; padding: 0 20px; border: none; cursor: pointer" onclick="window.open('https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing')">Conference Handbook</button></html>
<br><br><br><br>

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. <br>Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to ACL 2026". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

To access this event page, you are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://2026.aclweb.org/registration/) first.

Registration Required

The 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026) will take place in San Diego, California, from July 2 - 7, 2026.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as tool-using \emph{agents}, and existing methods for evaluating and optimizing tool usage by LLMs typically assume a static tool environment with fixed APIs and documentation. In practice, toolsets evolve as tools are added, changed, or deprecated, introducing instability for agents that must retain prior competence while adapting to new capabilities. We formalize this challenge as the stability--adaptation dilemma. To address it, we propose ContDa, a continual documentation adaptation framework that provides a generalizable solution to this problem, enabling LLM agents to self-evolve by updating tool documentation. ContDa combines relation-guided exploration, which leverages functionally related existing tools as anchors to probe and identify new tool capabilities, with relation-aware adjustment that organizes overlapping tools and explicitly encodes usage preferences and fallback options among them. We then introduce complementary metrics that disentangle performance from stability and adaptation. Experiments across three evolution patterns on dynamic extensions of StableToolBench and RestBench show that ContDa consistently improves average performance by enhancing the discovery of new capabilities while incurring only limited loss of previously solved tasks, demonstrating documentation adaptation as an effective and lightweight mechanism for robust tool use in evolving environments. Our code is available at https://github.com/Bingo-W/ContDa.

Beyond Static Toolsets: Self-Evolving LLM Tool Agents via Continual Documentation Adaptation

Current retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) methods struggle with complex multi-hop reasoning, relying on unstructured semantic matching that lacks the logical structure needed to systematically guide retrieval. We introduce Programmatic Retrieval Optimization with Generative Reasoning and Augmented Multi-queries (PROGRAM), a novel framework that elevates retrieval to structured, program-guided reasoning. PROGRAM treats retrieval as execution of specific program types, such as logical, temporal, causal, and so forth, through three stages of 'Program-Type Selection' with dual-metric optimization, 'Iterative Active Program Pruning' with evidence accumulation, and 'Final Answer Generation' with reranking. Evaluated on five benchmarks including HotPotQA, 2WikiMultihopQA, ARC-Challenge, MMLU-Pro, and MedQA with various LLMs, PROGRAM achieves state-of-the-art performance with up to 24% relative improvement on HotPotQA and 13.2% on MedQA over strong baselines including FLARE, ProbTree and Self-RAG.

PROGRAM: Programmatic Retrieval Optimization with Generative Reasoning and Augmented Multi-queries

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) allocate substantial inference-time compute to Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, improving performance on mathematics, scientific QA, and tool usage. However, this introduces overthinking: LRMs often reach a correct intermediate solution, continue reasoning, and overwrite it with an incorrect answer. We first demonstrate that oracle stopping—where we inject &lt;/think&gt; at every sentence boundary and select the best stopping point in hindsight—improves average accuracy by 8% while reducing thinking tokens by 72%, exposing substantial overthinking. Motivated by this finding, we propose ThinkBrake, which monitors the log-probability margin between the top continuation token and &lt;/think&gt; at sentence boundaries, stopping reasoning when this margin narrows. ThinkBrake requires no training and achieves favorable accuracy–efficiency trade-offs across math, scientific QA, and tool usage benchmarks, reducing thinking token usage by up to 30%. Furthermore, we provide theoretical analysis showing that ThinkBrake is equivalent to test-time realignment with a reward bonus for the &lt;/think&gt; token.

ThinkBrake: Efficient Reasoning via Log-Probability Margin Guided Decoding

Argumentation skills are an essential toolkit for large language models (LLMs). These skills are crucial in various use cases, including self-reflection, debating collaboratively for diverse answers, and countering hate speech. In this paper, we create the first benchmark for a standardized evaluation of LLM-based approaches to computational argumentation, encompassing 33 datasets from previous work in unified form. Using the benchmark, we evaluate the generalizability of five LLM families across 46 computational argumentation tasks that cover mining arguments, assessing perspectives, assessing argument quality, reasoning about arguments, and generating arguments. On the benchmark, we conduct an extensive systematic analysis of the contribution of few-shot examples, reasoning steps, model size, and training skills to the performance of LLMs on the computational argumentation tasks in the benchmark.

ArgBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Computational Argumentation Tasks

The inability to filter out in advance all potentially problematic data from the pre-training of large language models has given rise to the need for methods for unlearning specific pieces of knowledge after training. Existing techniques overlook the need for continuous and immediate action, causing them to suffer from degraded utility as updates accumulate and protracted exposure of sensitive information. To address these issues, we propose **C**ontinual **U**nlearning in **R**e**a**l **T**ime with **E**nsured Preservation of LLM Knowledge (**CURaTE**). Our method begins by training a sentence embedding model on a dataset designed to enable the formation of sharp decision boundaries for determining whether a given input prompt corresponds to any stored forget requests. The similarity of a given input to the forget requests is then used to determine whether to answer or return a refusal response. We show that even with such a simple approach, not only does **CURaTE** achieve more effective forgetting than existing methods, but by avoiding modification of the language model parameters, it also maintains near perfect knowledge preservation over any number of updates and is the only method capable of continual unlearning in real-time.

CURaTE: Continual Unlearning in Real Time with Ensured Preservation of LLM Knowledge

Reasoning-tuned LLMs utilizing long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) excel at single-answer tasks, yet their ability to model Human Label Variation—which requires capturing probabilistic ambiguity rather than resolving it—remains underexplored. We investigate this through systematic disentanglement experiments on distribution-based tasks, employing Cross-CoT experiments to isolate the effect of reasoning text from intrinsic model priors. We observe a distinct "decoupled mechanism": while CoT improves distributional alignment, final accuracy is dictated by CoT content (99% variance contribution), whereas distributional ranking is governed by model priors (over 80%). Step-wise analysis further shows that while CoT’s influence on accuracy grows monotonically during the reasoning process, distributional structure is largely determined by LLM’s intrinsic priors. These findings suggest that long CoT serves as a decisive LLM decision-maker for the top option but fails to function as a granular distribution calibrator for ambiguous tasks.

Decoupling the Effect of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: A Human Label Variation Perspective

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable potential in recommendation systems but suffer from prohibitive inference latency. Existing distillation approaches typically target Small Language Models (SLMs) or Conventional Recommendation Models (CRMs), face a critical trade-off between computational cost and semantic reasoning capacity. To bridge this accuracy-efficiency gap, we introduce Reasoning-to-Encoder Distillation (R2END), a framework that establishes a text encoder as the optimal student architecture for scalable recommendation. Unlike methods that mimic token generation, R2END compresses the teacher’s reasoning into a dense vector space via a semantic alignment objective, effectively capturing user-item dynamics. Extensive experiments on four datasets demonstrate that R2END not only outperforms state-of-the-art baselines but also achieves drastically reduced latency, offering a sweet spot for recommendation.

Distilling LLM Reasoning into Dense Encoders: Bridging the Accuracy-Efficiency Gap in Recommendation

As emotional support chatbots have recently gained significant traction across both research and industry, a common evaluation strategy has emerged: use help-seeker simulators to interact with supporter chatbots. However, current simulators suffer from two critical limitations: (1) they fail to capture the behavioral diversity of real-world seekers, often portraying them as overly cooperative, and (2) they lack the controllability required to simulate specific seeker profiles. To address these challenges, we present a controllable seeker simulator driven by nine psychological and linguistic features that underpin seeker behavior. Using authentic Reddit conversations, we train our model via a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture, which effectively differentiates diverse seeker behaviors into specialized parameter subspaces, thereby enhancing fine-grained controllability. Our simulator achieves superior profile adherence and behavioral diversity compared to existing approaches. Furthermore, evaluating 7 prominent supporter models with our system uncovers previously obscured performance degradations. These findings underscore the utility of our framework in providing a more faithful and stress-tested evaluation for emotional support chatbots.

Stress-Testing Emotional Support Models: Moving from Homogeneous to Diverse Help Seekers

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown great potential in medical applications, yet existing benchmarks inadequately capture real-world clinical complexity. We introduce MEDSYN, a multilingual, multimodal benchmark of highly complex clinical cases with up to 7 distinct visual clinical evidence (CE) types per case. Mirroring clinical workflow, we evaluate 18 MLLMs on differential diagnosis (DDx) generation and final diagnosis (FDx) selection. While frontier models often match or even outperform human experts on DDx generation, all MLLMs exhibit a much larger DDx--FDx performance gap compared to expert clinicians, indicating a failure mode in synthesis of heterogeneous CE types. Ablations attribute this failure to (i) overreliance on less discriminative textual CE (\emph{e.g.}, medical history) and (ii) a cross-modal CE utilization gap. We introduce \emph{Evidence Sensitivity} to quantify the latter and show that a smaller gap correlates with higher diagnostic accuracy. Finally, we demonstrate how it can be used to guide interventions to improve model performance. https://github.com/jianing-lab/MEDSYN.

MEDSYN: Benchmarking Multi-EviDence SYNthesis in Complex Clinical Cases for Multimodal Large Language Models

Standard LLM personalization typically frames identity as a static retrieval task, overlooking the inherent incongruity of human personas, where stable traits coexist with atypical, context-specific stances. Existing methods struggle to reconcile these dimensions: prompting succumbs to context drift over long sequences, while fine-tuning often suppresses idiosyncratic ``quirks'' in favor of generic distributional patterns. To bridge this gap, we present QuirkyMind, a framework that disentangles identity definition from its expression. First, Traits Anchoring constructs a dual-stream latent state, fusing a sentence-level summary for semantic stability with a token-level sequence for generative control. This state is stabilized via In-Context Narrative Refinement using an alternating objective: a discriminative InfoNCE loss anchors the persona in representation space to prevent drift, while a generative cross-entropy loss ensures faithful verbalization. Finally, Persona Steered Generalization transfers the refined state to downstream tasks via parameter-efficient adapters. Empirical evaluations on Persona-Steered QA and Narrative Inference demonstrate that QuirkyMind mitigates drift, consolidating persona knowledge without erasing authentic incongruities.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2026

Beyond Static Toolsets: Self-Evolving LLM Tool Agents via Continual Documentation Adaptation

Similar lecture

Towards an anthropology of authority: doings, distributions, desires (Part II - The subjectivities that authority generates)