Canada

We propose SETI (Systematicity Evaluation of Textual Inference), a novel and comprehensive benchmark designed for evaluating pre-trained language models (PLMs) for their systematicity capabilities in the domain of textual inference. Specifically, SETI offers three different NLI tasks and corresponding datasets to evaluate various types of systematicity in reasoning processes. In order to solve these tasks, models are required to perform compositional inference based on known primitive constituents. We conduct experiments of SETI on six widely used PLMs. Results show that various PLMs are able to solve unseen compositional inferences when having encountered the knowledge of how to combine primitives, with good performance. However, they are considerably limited when this knowledge is unknown to the model (40-100 \% points decrease). Furthermore, we find that PLMs are able to improve dramatically once exposed to crucial compositional knowledge in minimalistic shots. These findings position SETI as the first benchmark for measuring the future progress of PLMs in achieving systematicity generalization in the textual inference.

&lt;iframe src=&quot;https://app.sli.do/event/1kgCXjyZMgdV89PsksaJsj/embed/polls/49083d14-9b00-415c-95da-eefe72561e93&quot; width=&quot;300&quot; height=&quot;400&quot;&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;

ACL 2023

SETI: Systematicity Evaluation of Textual Inference

systematicity

compositional generalization

### Welcome to The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025)

Message from the General Chair:<br>
*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.*<br>
[Read more](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GI_hvOpjswAuYdUTromfeDiPpCcqidwg/view?usp=sharing)<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 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)

We propose SETI (Systematicity Evaluation of Textual Inference), a novel and comprehensive benchmark designed for evaluating pre-trained language models (PLMs) for their systematicity capabilities in the domain of textual inference. Specifically, SETI offers three different NLI tasks and corresponding datasets to evaluate various types of systematicity in reasoning processes. In order to solve these tasks, models are required to perform compositional inference based on known primitive constituents. We conduct experiments of SETI on six widely used PLMs. Results show that various PLMs are able to solve unseen compositional inferences when having encountered the knowledge of how to combine primitives, with good performance. However, they are considerably limited when this knowledge is unknown to the model (40-100 \% points decrease). Furthermore, we find that PLMs are able to improve dramatically once exposed to crucial compositional knowledge in minimalistic shots. These findings position SETI as the first benchmark for measuring the future progress of PLMs in achieving systematicity generalization in the textual inference.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/1kgCXjyZMgdV89PsksaJsj/embed/polls/49083d14-9b00-415c-95da-eefe72561e93" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

poster

### Welcome to ACL 2023, the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics! 
<br>The conference will be held in Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023.<br><br>
Following the succession of the recent conferences in our field, ACL 2023 will adopt a hybrid format.
While the impact of Covid has considerably diminished in terms of traveling, obtaining visas to Canada
entails a very long process. Moreover, the global economic conditions pose challenges for many individuals to travel to conferences. Recognizing these circumstances, we know many participants may not be
able to attend the conference in person. Therefore, we are committed to providing a great virtual platform
so everyone has the opportunity to interact with other participants and enjoy the conference. Based on the
current registered participants, approxiately 30% have chosen to attend the conference virtually. Whether
you join us in person or virtually, we sincerely hope everyone has a remarkable conference experience.<br>
This General Chair’s message is where I express my gratitude to the many individuals who have made
enormous contributions to the conference over the past year.

Read [**ACL 2023 General Chair's message**](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WobYM7norbG4dI48s75HfJoD89qgX5a_F-6U8AteLSA/edit?usp=sharing/) in full.

##### **[Conference Handbook](https://2023.aclweb.org/downloads/acl2023-handbook.pdf)**
<br><br><br><br>

The Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) is the premier international scientific and professional society for people working on computational problems involving human language, a field often referred to as either computational linguistics or natural language processing.

Syntactic parsing is the task of assigning a syntactic structure to a sentence. There are two popular syntactic parsing methods: constituency and dependency parsing. Recent works have used syntactic embeddings based on constituency trees, incremental top-down parsing, and other word syntactic features for brain activity prediction given the text stimuli to study how the syntax structure is represented in the brain's language network. However, the effectiveness of dependency parse trees or the relative predictive power of the various syntax parsers across brain areas, especially for the listening task, is yet unexplored. In this study, we investigate the predictive power of the brain encoding models in three settings: (i) individual performance of the constituency and dependency syntactic parsing based embedding methods, (ii) efficacy of these syntactic parsing based embedding methods when controlling for basic syntactic signals, (iii) relative effectiveness of each of the syntactic embedding methods when controlling for the other. Further, we explore the relative importance of syntactic information (from these syntactic embedding methods) versus semantic information using BERT embeddings. We find that constituency parsers help explain activations in the temporal lobe and middle-frontal gyrus, while dependency parsers better encode syntactic structure in the angular gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex. Although semantic signals from BERT are more effective compared to any of the syntactic features or embedding methods, syntactic embedding methods explain additional variance for a few brain regions.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/1kgCXjyZMgdV89PsksaJsj/embed/polls/2b781225-5274-4da4-9b42-46cf55f500ef" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

How does the brain process syntactic structure while listening?

A popular approach to unveiling the black box of neural NLP models is to leverage saliency methods, which assign scalar importance scores to each input component. A common practice for evaluating whether an interpretability method is faithful has been to use evaluation-by-agreement -- if multiple methods agree on an explanation, its credibility increases. However, recent work has found that saliency methods exhibit weak rank correlations even when applied to the same model instance and advocated for alternative diagnostic methods. In our work, we demonstrate that rank correlation is not a good fit for evaluating agreement and argue that Pearson-r is a better-suited alternative. We further show that regularization techniques that increase faithfulness of attention explanations also increase agreement between saliency methods. By connecting our findings to instance categories based on training dynamics, we show that the agreement of saliency method explanations is very low for easy-to-learn instances. Finally, we connect the improvement in agreement across instance categories to local representation space statistics of instances, paving the way for work on analyzing which intrinsic model properties improve their predisposition to interpretability methods.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/1kgCXjyZMgdV89PsksaJsj/embed/polls/0be8d21b-75f7-4614-a30f-9b53b9a575d7" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

Easy to Decide, Hard to Agree: Reducing Disagreements Between Saliency Methods

Pre-trained multilingual language models (PMLMs) are commonly used when dealing with data from multiple languages and cross-lingual transfer. However, PMLMs are trained on varying amounts of data for each language. In practice this means their performance is often much better on English than many other languages. We explore to what extent this also applies to moral norms. Do the models capture moral norms from English and impose them on other languages? Do the models exhibit random and thus potentially harmful beliefs in certain languages? Both these issues could negatively impact cross-lingual transfer and potentially lead to harmful outcomes. In this paper, we (1) apply the MORALDIRECTION framework to multilingual models, comparing results in German, Czech, Arabic, Chinese, and English, (2) analyse model behaviour on filtered parallel subtitles corpora, and (3) apply the models to a Moral Foundations Questionnaire, comparing with human responses from different countries. Our experiments demonstrate that, indeed, PMLMs encode differing moral biases, but these do not necessarily correspond to cultural differences or commonalities in human opinions. We release our code and models.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/qQ87ZDnDYN6cfmCQWHFaok/embed/polls/4b4af841-101e-41cd-95d2-7a1fe7169a14" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

Speaking Multiple Languages Affects the Moral Bias of Language Models

Experts across diverse disciplines are often interested in making sense of large text collections. Traditionally, this challenge is approached either by noisy unsupervised techniques such as topic models, or by following a manual theme discovery process. In this paper, we expand the definition of a theme to account for more than just a word distribution, and include generalized concepts deemed relevant by domain experts. Then, we propose an interactive framework that receives and encodes expert feedback at different levels of abstraction. Our framework strikes a balance between automation and manual coding, allowing experts to maintain control of their study while reducing the manual effort required.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/qQ87ZDnDYN6cfmCQWHFaok/embed/polls/a9577990-8cee-49ef-9dc6-5bbd7250df0e" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

Interactive Concept Learning for Uncovering Latent Themes in Large Text Collections

To proactively offer social media users a safe online experience, there is a need for systems that can detect harmful posts and promptly alert platform moderators. In order to guarantee the enforcement of a consistent policy, moderators are provided with detailed guidelines. In contrast, most state-of-the-art models learn what abuse is from labelled examples and as a result base their predictions on spurious cues, such as the presence of group identifiers, which can be unreliable. In this work we introduce the concept of policy-aware abuse detection, abandoning the unrealistic expectation that systems can reliably learn which phenomena constitute abuse from inspecting the data alone. We propose a machine-friendly representation of the policy that moderators wish to enforce, by breaking it down into a collection of intents and slots. We collect and annotate a dataset of 3,535 English posts with such slots, and show how architectures for intent classification and slot filling can be used for abuse detection, while providing a rationale for model decisions.

Explainable Abuse Detection as Intent Classification and Slot Filling

While the link between color and emotion has been widely studied, how context-based changes in color impact the intensity of perceived emotions is not well understood. In this work, we present a new multimodal dataset for exploring the emotional connotation of color as mediated by line, stroke, texture, shape and language. Our dataset, FeelingBlue, is a collection of 19,788 4-tuples of abstract art ranked by annotators according to their evoked emotions and paired with rationales for those annotations. Using this corpus, we present a baseline for a new task: Justified Affect Transformation. Given an image I, the task is to 1) recolor I to enhance a specified emotion e and 2) provide a textual justification for the change in e. Our model is an ensemble of deep neural networks which takes I, generates an emotionally transformed color palette p conditioned on I, applies p to I, and then justifies the color transformation in text via a visual-linguistic model. Experimental results shed light on the emotional connotation of color in context, demonstrating both the promise of our approach on this challenging task and the considerable potential for future investigations enabled by our corpus.  Our dataset, code and models are available at https://github.com/amith-ananthram/feelingblue.

FeelingBlue: A Corpus for Understanding the Emotional Connotation of Color in Context

Current language models can generate high quality text. Are they simply copying text they have seen before, or have they learned generalizable linguistic abstractions? To tease apart these possibilities, we introduce RAVEN, a suite of analyses for assessing the novelty of generated text, focusing on sequential structure (n-grams) and syntactic structure. We apply these analyses to four neural language models (an LSTM, a Transformer, Transformer-XL, and GPT-2). For local structure - e.g., individual dependencies - model-generated text is substantially less novel than our baseline of human-generated text from each model’s test set. For larger-scale structure - e.g., overall sentence structure - model-generated text is as novel or even more novel than the human-generated baseline, but models still sometimes copy substantially, in some cases duplicating passages over 1,000 words long from the training set. We also perform extensive manual analysis showing that GPT-2 uses both compositional and analogical generalization mechanisms and that GPT-2’s novel text is usually well-formed morphologically and syntactically but has reasonably frequent semantic issues (e.g., being self-contradictory).

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/uyG7EHDP5trs2LHubv2Gj8/embed/polls/a6ebdb9b-86be-4871-9289-2c38f4b06f10" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

How much do language models copy from their training data? Evaluating linguistic novelty in text generation using RAVEN

Despite the subjective nature of semantic textual similarity (STS) and pervasive disagreements in STS annotation, existing benchmarks have used averaged human ratings as gold standard. Averaging masks the true distribution of human opinions on examples of low agreement, and prevents models from capturing the semantic vagueness that the individual ratings represent. In this work, we introduce USTS , the first Uncertainty-aware STS dataset with ∼15,000 Chinese sentence pairs and 150,000 labels, to study collective human opinions in STS. Analysis reveals that neither a scalar nor a single Gaussian fits a set of observed judgements adequately. We further show that current STS models cannot capture the variance caused by human disagreement on individual instances, but rather reflect the predictive confidence over the aggregate dataset.

Collective Human Opinions in Semantic Textual Similarity

We introduce dGSLM, the first "textless" model able to generate audio samples of naturalistic spoken dialogues.  It uses recent work on unsupervised spoken unit discovery coupled with a dual-tower transformer architecture with cross-attention trained on 2000 hours of two-channel raw conversational audio (Fisher dataset) without any text or labels. We show that our model is able to generate speech, laughter and other paralinguistic signals in the two channels simultaneously and reproduces more naturalistic and fluid turn taking compared to a text-based cascaded model.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/uyG7EHDP5trs2LHubv2Gj8/embed/polls/c1a37684-1b7f-487f-be4a-3ea5bdd78c3c" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

Generative Spoken Dialogue Language Modeling

In an information-seeking conversation, a user may ask questions that are under-specified or unanswerable. An ideal agent would interact by initiating different response types according to the available knowledge sources. However, most current studies either fail to or artificially incorporate such agent-side initiative. This work presents INSCIT, a dataset for Information-Seeking Conversations with mixed-initiative Interactions. It contains 4.7K user-agent turns from 805 human-human conversations where the agent searches over Wikipedia and either directly answers, asks for clarification, or provides relevant information to address user queries. The data supports two subtasks, evidence passage identification and response generation, as well as a human evaluation protocol to assess model performance. We report results of two systems based on state-of-the-art models of conversational knowledge identification and open-domain question answering. Both systems significantly underperform humans, suggesting ample room for improvement in future studies.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2023

How does the brain process syntactic structure while listening?

Similar lecture

Behavioural vs. Representational Systematicity in End-to-End Models: An Opinionated Survey