Explainable Semantic Textual Similarity via Dissimilar Span Detection

Calculating semantic textual similarity is a foundational task in natural language processing. Current large language models (LLMs) based methods typically rely on extracting last-layer hidden states with fixed dimensions to compute similarity for every text pairs. We argue that this paradigm is suffer from two limitations: (i) The last hidden layer encodes more general knowledge rather than just semantic knowledge, making it suboptimal for semantic similarity computation; (ii) The hidden layer dimensions of LLMs are generally very large, which introduces some redundancy and noise for representing semantics. In this work, we propose DySem, a novel training-free framework that investigates more semantic-related internal components of LLMs via multilingual consensus, and shifts away from static representation spaces in favor of dynamic, sample-specific semantic dimensions by constructing text-dependent joint semantic set and computes similarity over this shared dimensional subset. Extensive experiments across various LLMs show that our method consistently outperforms recent baselines while maintaining lower dimensions for similarity calculation. The code is released at https://github.com/szu-tera/DySem.

Semantic Textual Similarity (STS) methods assume that a document's lexical content faithfully represents what it asserts. This assumption fails for discursive documents that discuss, compare, critique, and contextualize other positions in the process of articulating their own. The result is semantic diffusion: similarity scores between documents are inflated by vocabulary acquired through discursive engagement rather than substantive alignment. Standard Natural Language Processing (NLP) preprocessing (tokenization, stopword removal, stemming, lemmatization) cannot address this problem because it operates at the lexical level, treating all content identically regardless of its discursive function. This paper introduces high-level text preprocessing: a systematic, rule-based intervention applied before the standard preprocessing pipeline to isolate each document's actual claim from its discursive structure. We propose 12 rules, each with an explicit rationale, and demonstrate their effect on an encyclopedic philosophical corpus: three entries from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (virtue ethics, deontological ethics, and consequentialism). A three-phase experiment using eight Transformer-based STS models shows that preprocessing reduces centroid cosine similarity scores across all three theory pairs, with 23 of 24 model-pair comparisons showing the expected decrease and cross-model agreement ranging from 7-1 to 8-0. We introduce the semantic diffusion index (SDI), a per-document metric for assessing the semantic reorientation between a document's raw and high-level preprocessed representations. Although the framework is demonstrated using philosophical texts, it potentially addresses a domain-agnostic problem applicable to legal texts, policy documents, academic articles, and any genre in which a discursive approach introduces vocabulary from positions the document does not endorse.

Reliable evaluation is essential for understanding large language model (LLM) performance, yet today's go-to metrics, namely token-overlap scores (e.g., ROUGE) and embedding-based measures (e.g., BERTScore), often misjudge semantic similarity of documents. Our study shows that both token-overlap metrics and embedding-based metrics routinely assign nearly identical scores to texts that directly contradict each other, thereby potentially masking fundamental errors. We introduce MATCHA, an automatic metric that jointly rewards semantic agreement with a reference and penalizes contradictions. MATCHA employs a dual-view perspective that measures (i) proximity to the gold text and (ii) distance from an adversarially generated counterfactual contradiction. In eight public benchmarks, MATCHA outperforms popular metrics, compared with human annotations on question-answering, image caption generation, natural language inference, summarization, and semantic textual similarity tasks. On the TruthfulQA dataset (i.e., a dataset without a training set, where no embedding-based metrics could locally train on), this improvement in terms of matching texts with a reference reaches 18.38% over ROUGE-L and 20.82% over BERTScore. Both quantitative comparison and qualitative human assessments confirm the efficacy and validity of MATCHA and uncover fundamental weaknesses in pre-existing metrics. Compared with 23 embedding models, including top state-of-the-art ones, used as a metric similar to BERTScore, MATCHA remains the most accurate in distinguishing correct from incorrect statements solely based on a reference. Our code and metric are publicly available (https://github.com/Siran-Li/MATCHA).