Natural Language Processing

The remarkable success of Transformer-based models in natural language processing stems from architectural scaling, which leads to a large number of parameters and hinders deployment in resource-constrained environments. While structured pruning offers a pathway to compression, existing state-of-the-art methods often rely on gradient-based importance ranking or stochastic gating, which suffer from instability, structural degeneration, and the need for extensive manual hyperparameter tuning. In this paper, we introduce CAHP (Complementary Attention Head Pruning), a novel post-hoc framework that redefines head selection as a global graph-theoretical problem. Rather than evaluating heads in isolation, CAHP utilizes graph-based clustering combined with information-theoretic distance measures to identify and preserve a topologically diverse subset of complementary attention heads. Without requiring a predefined sparsity level or pruning ratio, the framework automatically determines the number of selected attention heads across layers by identifying a diminishing marginal performance curve, where pruning additional heads leads to a sharp degradation in performance, as determined by the chosen polynomial degree. Extensive evaluations on the SST-5 and MNLI benchmarks, across different Transformer model scales, demonstrate that CAHP consistently outperforms competitive baselines, particularly in high-compression regimes. Furthermore, our structural analysis shows that CAHP avoids the "proximity bias" of gradient-based pruning methods, which tend to preserve heads mainly in layers close to the output, and instead retains a functionally critical set of attention heads in the model's intermediate layers.

Sequence labelling, a core task of Natural Language Processing (NLP), consists in assigning each token of an input sentence a label. From a Machine Learning point of view, sequence labelling is often cast as a Linear-Chain Conditional Random Field (CRF) parametrised by a neural network. While this approach gives good empirical results, CRFs assume a finite decision span (eg label bigrams) which can limit their expressivity and hurt performance when long-range dependencies are required. We show we can leverage diffusion to train a CRF conditioned on an entire label sequence, with the caveat that the condition is on a noisy version of labels. We show experimentally that this method, in conjunction with approximate CRF inference, improves label accuracy with a 16.5% error reduction for POS-tagging.

Large language models are increasingly proposed as educational tutors, yet stronger task-solving ability does not necessarily imply stronger learning support. Motivated by recent calls to measure the social impact of NLP systems in practice, we study whether public LLM tutoring benchmarks distinguish learning-supportive behavior from mere answer production. We propose a lightweight diagnostic based on the gap between solving-oriented and pedagogy-oriented benchmark performance. Using public MathTutorBench leaderboard results, we show that these dimensions are only partially aligned: across eight publicly reported models, the correlation between solving and pedagogy composites is 0.421, and several models shift meaningfully in rank when evaluation moves from solving to pedagogy. We then analyze the public TutorBench sample and show that agency-relevant behaviors are explicitly encoded in benchmark rubrics, especially in active-learning settings that reward guiding questions, calibrated hints, and non-disclosive scaffolding. Together, these findings suggest that educational-impact evaluation should not treat task success as a sufficient proxy for learning support. We argue that public tutoring benchmarks can better support positive-impact evaluation by reporting solving-oriented and pedagogy-oriented scores separately and by making disclosure-sensitive, student-agency-preserving criteria more explicit.

Existing financial-NLP benchmarks mostly evaluate prepared artifacts such as filings, tables, or extracted values. Real accounting begins earlier: source documents must be reconciled into cited journal entries, aggregated into a balance sheet, and checked for contradictions. We introduce FinBalance, a multi-document accounting reconciliation benchmark built from source-document bundles across eight industries, three period types, and five difficulty levels. Human-authored business scenarios, accounting policies, tax/FX treatments, document schemas, distractors, and inconsistency templates are composed by a deterministic generator whose ledger produces journal entries,balance sheets, and 23 inconsistency-code labels. On a 710-record evaluation split, six contemporary LLMs reach at most 46% exact final-balance-sheet accuracy. Four models show a 26-41 pp gap between BS_exact, the model's reported balance sheet, and BS_recon, the balance sheet obtained by replaying its entries through our ledger. Models often recover numerically plausible entries but fail to bind them to supporting documents and aggregate them consistently. Citation-pressure prompting barely changes document-linking errors, while ledger-feedback ablations substantially improve reported balance sheets and expose inconsistency-detection trade-offs. Expert finance reviewers validate the benchmark design and labels.

The deployment of NLP systems has raised concerns about harms they might produce, including representational harms. Recent literature has begun to conceptualize and measure one such harm, the harm of erasure. Nevertheless, the field lacks a clear and cohesive conceptual foundation for identifying and measuring erasure. Existing conceptualizations of erasure are often broad -- making it difficult to identify what is needed to establish and measure erasure -- or else specific to particular settings -- facilitating measurement for those settings but potentially challenging to adapt to other settings. To address this gap, we develop and propose a structured definition of erasure that clarifies what components are necessary for establishing whether erasure has occurred, which practitioners need to explicitly articulate and operationalize in order to measure erasure.

We present our approach to SemEval 2026 Task 4: Narrative Story Similarity and Narrative Representation Learning. Our solution uses contrastive learning with fine-tuned sentence transformers to capture narrative similarity across abstract themes, course of action, and outcomes. We develop two pipelines: (Track A) a single-view method that encodes full narratives with smart layer freezing to reduce overfitting, and (Track B) a multi-view method that models theme, plot, and outcome with view-specific projection heads and self-supervised alignment. Both pipelines build on sentence-transformers models and are trained with contrastive loss on synthetic data. The code is available at the following GitHub repository: https://github.com/dinhthienan33/SemEval2026-Task4-ttda704.

In-context learning (ICL) is the standard method for low-resource classification, yet its efficacy in specialized domains remains largely unexplored. We address the challenge of classifying semantically complex, multi-party B2B conversations, where traditional ICL encounters significant limitations, especially as context length increases due to the concatenation of multiple few-shot examples. We introduce the \texttt{Call Playbook} dataset, featuring five classification tasks derived from real-world B2B conversations targeting core sales concepts. To bridge the gap between performance and practical utility, we propose novel knowledge extraction methods that distill verbose examples into compact, interpretable representations of structured classification criteria and precise task descriptions. Our approach achieves a 99% reduction in token usage and improves macro-averaged AUC by up to 7% over traditional ICL. Notably, it remains robust as context grows, unlike advanced token compression baselines which degrade by over 9 F1 points. Importantly, our framework enables direct refinement of classification logic, addressing critical needs for transparency, efficiency, and user interaction in real-world NLP applications.

Socio-cultural stereotypical bias is an important consideration in the development and deployment of NLP systems. It is however often considered only at the national level, despite rich subnational socio-cultural structures. We present AmchiBias, the first benchmark for measuring socio-cultural stereotypical bias for the Indian state of Goa with its unique historically multicultural setting. It covers various Goan identity groups and comprises 313 minimal pairs across eight sociodemographic dimensions in both English and Devanagari Konkani. We then evaluate stereotypical bias in five multilingual encoder models on this benchmark. We find near-chance scores in Konkani, reflecting language incompetence for general multilingual models and a lack of Goan cultural competence for Indian language models. Queried in English, models with a stronger Indian language coverage show higher bias for pan-Indian groups than hyperlocal Goan groups. This suggests the English signal reflects pan-Indian pretraining associations rather than genuine Goan cultural knowledge. Our findings highlight a critical gap in low-resource multilingual NLP evaluation for hyperlocal community identities.

Multiagent language model systems, such as collaborative reasoning and debate, produce multiple correlated candidate answers and confidence signals. However, these signals are usually calibrated only at the individual agent level, and provide no principled confidence estimate for the system's final answer. We formulate this as a confidence composition problem where combining confidence across agents and reasoning stages while preserving both selective utility and probabilistic reliability. We study confidence-aware routing and log-odds pooling protocols that select among candidate answers and output a system-level confidence. Across five benchmarks, 30 heterogeneous and homogeneous model pairs, and two confidence estimators, our gated-fusion methods improve AUARC and reduce Brier score over single agent, standard debate, and selective debate baselines, while retaining competitive weighted F1-score as a correctness metric. We further show that our log-odds fusion is overconfident due to correlated intermediate signals. We propose a shared dependence discount that substantially improves reliability while preserving predictions.

Despite recent progress in Natural Language Processing (NLP), models remain vulnerable to word substitution attacks. Most existing defenses focus on first order sensitivity and measure how much the output changes when the input is slightly perturbed. However, they ignore how this sensitivity evolves, which is described by curvature. When gradients vary sharply, models can still fail. This paper introduces the Smooth Growth Bound Tensor (S-GBT), a second order method that bounds the Hessian element-wise, for which we provide formal theoretical proofs on the resulting robustness bounds. A regularization term is added during training to minimize these bounds. This yields tighter certified robustness against word substitution attacks. The change in the output under word substitution is bounded by both a linear term and a quadratic term. S-GBT is derived for two architectures: Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN). The method is integrated directly into the training objective. Its effectiveness is evaluated on multiple benchmark datasets. The results show that combining first and second order regularization improves certified robust accuracy by up to 23.4% compared to prior methods, while clean accuracy remains competitive. These findings indicate that controlling both the gradient and its variation is a promising direction for building more robust models.

Multinational companies increasingly require cross-jurisdictional contract review, yet existing legal NLP datasets are largely restricted to a single jurisdiction. We introduce LAUKIN (Legal equivalence dataset of Australia, UK, and INdia), a dataset of clause pairs (AU-UK, UK-IN, IN-AU) labelled for boolean legal equivalence. We develop a novel multi-stage retrieval and reranking pipeline to construct the initial clause pair mapping, with a subset of clause pairs subsequently annotated by legal experts as Equivalent or Not Equivalent. The dataset comprises 14,727 clause pairs from 204 contracts across 8 agreement types, of which 3,000 are manually labelled: 900 train, 600 dev, and 1,500 test. We evaluate 12 models across 4 techniques, achieving a best macro-F1 of 65.11%, establishing LAUKIN as a challenging benchmark. Results reveal that, despite shared legal heritage, drafting conventions diverge significantly across jurisdictions, making cross-jurisdictional equivalence classification non-trivial. LAUKIN also includes 11,727 unlabelled training pairs to support future semi-supervised learning research in legal NLP.

The extraction of structured clinical information from unstructured EHR notes is a persistent bottleneck in healthcare informatics. While large language models (LLMs) offer high performance, their deployment in clinical settings is hindered by privacy risks, inference costs, and the tendency to hallucinate beyond textual evidence. We address these challenges for the CL4Health 2026 Case Report Form (CRF) filling task by proposing a fully local, domain-adapted pipeline using the MedGemma-27B model. Our two-stage architecture, which separates binary presence classification from value extraction, enforces strict adherence to textual evidence and ensures deterministic outputs for negated, uncertain, or unknown states. By leveraging item-specific, few-shot in-context learning without external API calls or fine-tuning, our approach achieves a macro-F1 score of 0.55 on the official English test track. This result secures second place among all locally-hosted, open-source submissions. Our work demonstrates that privacy-preserving, on-premise LLM pipelines can achieve near-competitive performance with proprietary frontier models, providing a practical, data-sovereign framework for clinical NLP.

Recently, large language models (LLMs) have achieved promising progress in the fields of classical Chinese translation and the generation of classical poetry. However, domain-specific research on precise translation and affective-semantic understanding of classical poetry remains limited. The main challenge is that most studies treat the poetic appreciation task as a general-domain problem, neglecting the distinctive features of poetic appreciation, while high-quality and domain-specific datasets are extremely limited. To address this limitation, we decompose the task into three subtasks: term interpretation, semantic interpretation, and emotional inference. Based on multiple open-source datasets, we perform data cleansing and alignment to construct the Classical Chinese Poetry Instruction Pair Dataset (CCPoetry-49K), which comprises 49,404 high-quality instruction-response pairs explicitly optimized for this domain. We then propose a domain-specialized LLM, called PoetryQwen, by applying Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) to fine-tune the Qwen2.5-14B model. Experimental results on the CCL25-Eval Task 5 benchmark demonstrate that PoetryQwen achieves a score of 0.757, representing a 9.7% improvement over the Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct baseline (0.690). These findings clearly indicate that PoetryQwen significantly enhances performance in precise translation and emotional understanding of classical poetry. We present new dataset and methodological considerations intended to support the domain-specific optimization of LLMs.

Can financial news reliably predict short-term stock movements? Despite advances in large language models, this question remains unresolved. We revisit this problem using a zero-shot natural language processing framework, investigating whether models can extract actionable signals from financial news without domain-specific training. We design a structured pipeline that combines zero-shot natural language inference with temporal aggregation, explicitly modelling recency and event-dependent impact horizons when integrating information across articles. To address the need for transparency in high-stakes settings, we introduce a multi-layered explainability framework that links predictions to token-level, article-level, and aggregate evidence, and produces grounded natural language rationales. Across multiple models and prediction horizons, we find that zero-shot approaches consistently fail to outperform simple baselines, with particularly weak performance on negative movements, suggesting deeper structural limitations in mapping news sentiment to short-term price dynamics. However, explainability signals reliably distinguish between trustworthy and unreliable predictions, offering practical value even when accuracy is limited. These findings highlight the limits of zero-shot financial NLP and motivate a shift toward decision-support systems that prioritise transparency and uncertainty awareness. Code: https://github.com/alimert05/zero-shot-stock-xai

Most fairness research in NLP assumes direct access to protected attributes such as gender, race, or nationality. In practice, however, such information is often unavailable due to privacy constraints, missing metadata, or legal restrictions, even though models may infer it from indirect textual cues. This raises a key question: can debiasing succeed without direct access to sensitive attributes? We propose H-SAL, which performs post-hoc concept and attribute erasure using self-description text as an implicit debiasing signal. To support this setting, we introduce a multi-domain Stack Exchange-based fairness benchmark for helpfulness prediction that includes both explicit and implicit signals, enabling comparison between standard debiasing with protected labels and debiasing without access to sensitive information. Across encoder and decoder-only language models, we find that implicit self-description often matches or outperforms explicit-label-based debiasing. Our results broaden representation-level fairness research and provide a new benchmark for studying debiasing under realistic data constraints.

We present StanceNakba 2026, a shared task on stance detection in polarized social media discourse related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, organized as part of Nakba-NLP 2026 at LREC-COLING 2026. The task introduces two subtasks: Subtask A (Actor-Level Stance Detection), which classifies English social media posts as Pro-Palestine, Pro-Israel, or Neutral; and Subtask B (Cross-Topic Stance Detection), which identifies Favor, Against, or Neither stances in Arabic posts toward two conflict-related topics, normalization with Israel and refugee presence in Jordan. The task is grounded in an annotated dataset of 2,606 social media posts. A total of 7 teams participated in Subtask A and 6 teams in Subtask B. Participating systems primarily fine-tuned Arabic and multilingual transformer-based models, including MARBERT, AraBERT, and DeBERTa-v3 variants, with several teams employing cross-validation, ensemble methods, and topic-conditioned architectures. The best-performing systems achieved a Macro F1 of 0.9620 on Subtask A and 0.8724 on Subtask B, demonstrating that transformer-based approaches are highly effective for conflict-domain stance detection while highlighting persistent challenges in cross-topic generalization and neutral class prediction.

Bangla is among the world's most widely spoken languages, yet it remains underserved in educational NLP research. In many remote and rural regions, access to qualified subject teachers is limited, and written answers are consequently graded largely by hand, restricting timely and consistent feedback. Automatic assessment is challenging because semantically correct responses can vary substantially in surface form. We present a bilingual (Bangla-English) evaluation system designed for low-resource educational settings that prioritizes semantic correctness over lexical overlap. Our approach fine-tunes a lightweight language model to grade each response using the question, reference answer, and student answer, producing a numeric score and concise, context-grounded feedback suitable for classroom deployment. We also construct a synthetic bilingual dataset to enable controlled training and evaluation. Across proprietary and open-source LLMs evaluated under a unified protocol, our QLoRA-tuned Qwen3-8B confirms consistent improvement by producing the most leakage-resistant feedback (RoRa = 0.819) in synthetic evaluation and the strongest agreement with human scores (rho = 0.936, MAE = 0.725) in a dedicated human study.

Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) has become essential for adapting foundation models to downstream NLP tasks. However, current PEFT methods often struggle with robustness to noise and performance degradation on limited training data. We propose SDBN (Small Data Big Noise), a unified framework that brings adversarial training to PEFT - a combination that remains less studied in the PEFT setting despite its complementary strengths - to enhance model robustness and generalization, outperforming alternative approaches. We also introduce two variants of the method that use discrete uncertainty sets: SDBN-h, which enumerates character-level edits and selects worst-case variants using gradients, and SDBN-p, which uses LLM-generated variants for robust optimization in generative tasks. Experiments across multiple benchmarks reveal substantial improvements, particularly in low-resource settings and under both word-level and character-level corruptions. This framework addresses the less explored intersection of adversarial training and parameter-efficient adaptation, without introducing additional parameters or only modest computational overhead, making PEFT deployments more reliable in real-world scenarios where data scarcity and linguistic variability often coexist

Language models, as multi-task learners, acquire a wide range of abilities during training. A fundamental question is how much task-specific data is needed to learn a given task. Answering this for natural language is difficult: tasks are hard to delineate and can confound one another. To rigorously investigate the relationship between data frequency and learnability, we turn to a controlled setting using formal languages induced from probabilistic finite automata. These serve as a methodological testbed to demonstrate that standard correlational evaluation practices are inherently flawed. To enable causal analysis, we introduce the binning semiring, an algebraic object that lets us control how often a targeted property occurs in a sampled corpus. We formulate the experimental pipeline as a causal graphical model and derive decomposed Kullback-Leibler divergence metrics to measure the learnability of specific sub-tasks. Our experiments show that evaluating learnability without causal intervention leads to incorrect conclusions due to confounders in correlational analysis, and serve as a warning about correlational pitfalls in natural-language settings.

Despite remarkable progress in machine translation (MT), non-AI communities have raised growing concerns about MT systems, suggesting a noticeable gap between technical advancement and the needs of real-world users. For instance, while NLP researchers focus on benchmark performance, end users care about ethical concerns, trust, reliability, costs, and more. We argue that listening to various user communities is essential so that research efforts would be directed towards the problems that the communities care about. To this end, we present a large-scale analysis, for the first time, that investigates what four stakeholder communities (AI developers, professional translators, language learners, and language service providers) post about MT technology on social media. To do so, we construct a dataset of 79,286 posts and comments from Reddit, Facebook, Bluesky, and Mastodon from 2019 to 2025, and analyse where these communities disagree, and how and why. Overall, we find that communities often disagree, and even show strong conflicts due to polarised sentiments on topics such as translation quality, efficiency, and reliability. This is because these communities approach these topics differently: the AI community frames them as technical and computational problems, while non-AI (user) communities care more about quality nuances, time savings, user trust, and broader social issues.

Writing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) is a high-labor, knowledge-intensive document burden; English-language research has demonstrated that generative AI can significantly reduce drafting time, yet automated IEP generation in Traditional Chinese remains virtually unexplored due to domain data scarcity, strict privacy regulations, and the absence of local evaluation benchmarks. We propose a low-resource fine-tuning pipeline centered on Corpus-Grounded Feature Diffusion (CGFD): (1) 25 dual-expert high-score seed transcripts are selected via a tau threshold with flag-aware score caps; (2) a FeatureProfile (sentence length, structure, quantification templates) is extracted from seeds and injected into LLM prompts alongside Verbalized-Sampling-style diversity control to drive diffusion; (3) 15 expert gold seeds are used as diffusion anchors, targeting 585 samples; 567 valid diffusion samples are obtained, yielding a 582-sample training set used to fine-tune Breeze-7B with QLoRA; (4) schema-constrained inference via Grammar-Constrained Decoding (GCD) enforces a hierarchical SMART Goal Ladder schema at inference time. Ablation results on a 55-sample schema stress set reveal an unexpected finding: GCD is counterproductive under Traditional Chinese token budgets -- the no-GCD path achieves 100% schema pass rate at 34% lower median latency, outperforming GCD on both reliability and speed. On the n=10 formal hold-out, the no-GCD inference path achieves BERTScore F1 = 0.779, exceeding GPT-5.4 (0.726), DeepSeek-V3.2 (0.703), Gemini-3-Flash-Preview (0.703), and Llama-4-Maverick (0.700) zero-shot baselines while maintaining fully local, air-gapped inference. This system addresses a gap in Traditional Chinese special-education NLP and offers a scalable, privacy-preserving local inference solution under an industrial engineering paradigm.

Rule-following agents tasked with executing policies and regulations often fail via Silent Scope Omission (SSO): a model applies a general rule but silently drops nested exceptions or counter-exceptions, producing outputs that appear compliant yet break on important edge cases. Although such failures are often framed as an agentic-systems problem, the underlying bottleneck is statutory and policy understanding, a capability typically studied in legal NLP. However, most existing legal NLP benchmarks emphasize end-task outcomes, which can overlook the structural omissions that cause SSO. To diagnose and mitigate SSO, we introduce NormBench, a benchmark of 2,290 provisions spanning Chinese (laws and local policies), English (U.S. tax law, GDPR, and corporate policies), and cross-lingual settings, designed for defeasible scope parsing: identifying precisely which clause overrides which. NormBench uses Span-Grounded Deontic Trees (SG-DT), a compiler-style intermediate representation that anchors every logical branch to source spans and requires explicit exclusion guards, enabling deterministic compilation and audit. Evaluations of frontier LLMs reveal two recurring pathologies: (1) Recursion Decay, where performance drops sharply as defeater depth increases, and (2) an Auditability Trap, where models retrieve relevant spans but fail to assemble correct control flow. Using SG-DT as a constrained intermediate output improves whole-tree fidelity and defeater recovery, and downstream experiments show that its utility is mechanism-specific: gains concentrate on exception-active, SSO-prone cases, while aggregate accuracy can be mixed when the added structure is unnecessary or parser fidelity is low.

Social meaning in language is inherently perspectival, varying across annotator backgrounds, demographics, and ideological positions. However, most NLP systems collapse this variation into a single ground-truth label, ignoring the diversity of interpretations. In this work, we model social dimensions along a perspectivist spectrum, capturing how interpretations vary across demographic groups on a dataset consisting of 28k human annotations. We benchmark multiple modeling paradigms, including zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuned approaches, and propose fusion embeddings that integrate textual and demographic representations. Our fusion models yield consistent and statistically significant improvements over text-only baselines across all fusion strategies (+5.9-6.5% relative macro PR-AUC), with shuffle ablations confirming that demographic profiles carry genuine predictive signal rather than spurious correlations.

Evaluating the quality of automatically generated keyphrases remains a complex challenge. Traditional metrics either rely on exact lexical matching or consider semantic similarity while ignoring prediction ranking, both of which misalign with how humans judge informativeness and relevance. We introduce Semantic R-Precision (SemR-p), a novel evaluation metric that integrates semantic similarity into the rank-aware R-Precision framework. Designed from a human-centric perspective and inspired by Information Retrieval metrics, SemR-p rewards semantically relevant keyphrases that appear early in the output list. We conducted extensive analyses to assess its semantic sensitivity, ranking awareness, and discriminative power across models and datasets. The results suggest that SemR-p offers a complementary lens for evaluating keyphrase predictions, helping to better reflect user-centred notions of relevance alongside traditional lexical and semantic matching metrics.

The rapid digitalisation of financial systems has improved operational efficiency and financial inclusion while simultaneously increasing exposure to sophisticated forms of cyber-enabled fraud and electronic financial misconduct. Conventional auditing systems, which largely depend on retrospective verification and rule-based monitoring, increasingly struggle to address the complexity and speed of modern financial crime. Consequently, financial institutions are progressively adopting Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled Accounting Information Systems (AIS) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) technologies to strengthen fraud detection, continuous auditing, and institutional monitoring. This study examined the influence of AI-enabled AIS on auditing and fraud detection effectiveness within Nigeria's financial services sector while additionally evaluating the moderating role of NLP. Anchored on the Fraud Diamond Theory and the Technology Acceptance Model, the study adopted a quantitative cross-sectional survey design. Primary data were collected from 186 professionals across banking, insurance, and FinTech institutions in Nigeria. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, multiple regression, and hierarchical moderated regression techniques. The findings revealed that AI-enabled AIS significantly improves auditing and fraud detection effectiveness, particularly through prevention, detection, data analysis, and investigative capabilities. The results further indicated that NLP positively moderates the relationship between AI-enabled AIS and auditing effectiveness by improving semantic interpretation and analytical explainability. The study concludes that AI-enabled AIS and NLP are increasingly important for strengthening fraud governance, regulatory accountability, and institutional trust within emerging digital financial environments.

Software testing is critical for verifying that systems meet specified requirements, yet remains among the most time-consuming and expensive activities in development. Requirements-based test generation allows test cases to be derived early from requirements artifacts, but generating them directly from natural language is challenging due to inherent ambiguity and imprecision. Recent advances in AI, natural language processing (NLP), and large language models (LLMs) have made automating this pipeline increasingly feasible, while introducing new risks including hallucination, reduced traceability, and inconsistent evaluation. This survey addresses four research questions: what AI and NLP techniques have been proposed for generating test cases from natural language requirements; what tools and frameworks support these approaches; how generated test cases are evaluated; and what research gaps remain. Following Kitchenham and Charters' systematic review guidelines, we searched major scholarly databases spanning 2000-2025 and, after applying strict inclusion criteria, identified 21 primary studies. The literature is organized into three evolutionary eras, revealing that no existing approach simultaneously satisfies six key quality dimensions: automation, ambiguity handling, domain applicability, traceability, evaluation thoroughness, and hallucination control. The survey makes three main contributions: a three-era evolutionary synthesis of AI-based test generation; a six-criteria gap analysis showing no current approach fully addresses all quality dimensions; and four actionable research guidelines targeting hallucination, traceability, complexity sensitivity, and compliance.

We investigate the extent to which the language processing of LLMs resembles human cognitive processes, focusing on a human cognitive bias called the $\textit{neglect-zero effect}$. This effect refers to the human tendency to ignore $\textit{zero-models}$, which are configurations that render a proposition vacuously true by virtue of an empty set. We focus on two types of inferences driven by the neglect-zero effect, and examine how LLMs process these inferences by comparing their behavior with that in an inference that does not involve the neglect-zero effect. For this purpose, we employ a paradigm based on $\textit{structural priming}$, where recent exposure to a preceding sentence (the $\textit{prime}$) facilitates the processing of a subsequent sentence (the $\textit{target}$) due to their structural similarity. We prepare primes to force LLMs to consider the zero-model, and analyze whether they also consider it in the target. The results suggest that the neglect-zero effect may not occur in the LLMs analyzed in this study. Our code is available at https://github.com/ynklab/neglect_zero

The rapid development of large language models(LLMs) has led to remarkable advances in natural language processing. However, the increasing scale of these models introduces substantial challenges in terms of storage, transmission, and deployment. Though great efforts have been devoted to model compression and quantization, existing methods often rely on fine-tuning or calibration data, which exhibit limited generalization across different tensor types. In this paper, we argue that video codecs offer a promising solution for LLM compression, due to their inherent compatibility with matrix structured data, configurable compression strategies, and the availability of highly optimized, off-the-shelf implementations. Therefore, we present LLMCodec, a video codec-based LLM compression method that integrates affine quantization with the recent VVC/H.266 video codec. Beyond VVC, we further compare a range of video codecs and encoding profiles to evaluate their impact on compression performance. Experiments on different models demonstrate the robustness and generality of LLMCodec. Notably, on LLaMA-3-8B at 2-bit precision, LLMCodec reduces perplexity by over 1.5x and improves downstream task accuracy by 21% compared with the existing method.

Coreference resolution is a core NLP task, having a broad range of downstream applications, e.g.~machine translation, question answering, document summarization, etc. While the task is well-studied in English, comparatively less attention is dedicated to coreference resolution in other languages, especially low-resource ones. To mitigate this gap, we propose a novel coreference resolution pipeline that harnesses machine translation (MT) from English to a target low-resource language, to generate or expand training data. To automatically validate the quality of the translated samples, we back-translate the samples and assess the similarity with the original English samples via cosine similarity in the latent space of a BERT model. The resulting similarity scores are integrated into the loss function to weight training samples according to their MT cycle consistency. Extensive experiments on four low-resource languages show that our pipeline brings significant performance gains in coreference resolution. Moreover, our pipeline enables accurate coreference resolution in languages where no previous corpora were available.

The widespread use of Large Language Models (LLMs) as writing tools challenges the validity of crowdsourced data, as crowdworkers may outsource tasks to models. To better understand how this is addressed, we surveyed 155 researchers in NLP and related disciplines about their experiences and opinions on collecting free-text responses via crowdsourcing. This paper provides an overview of practitioners' challenges, mitigation strategies, and the foreseen implications on data quality. 44% of respondents reported observing LLM usage in their crowdsourced data. While 93% of them had anticipated this, half were unsure what precautions to take. The most prevalent detection strategies are distinctive textual style patterns and unusually fast completion times. Overall, survey responses show that the research community is aware of the problem and taking measures, but existing efforts remain insufficient to fully address it. Finally, we derive a set of considerations to guide future crowdsourced free-text data collection in the era of LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable both to hallucination and adversarial manipulation. Although these problems are closely related, existing defences typically address them separately. We investigate a hybrid defence framework that combines entropy-based models, designed to reduce hallucinations, with uncertainty-based models and geometric-based models, designed to reduce vulnerability. Under in-domain tests on Natural Language Understanding datasets (FEVER, HotpotQA, CSQA, SIQA) we find our hybrid model improves both clean-task performance (up to 43.34% increase in accuracy) and adversarial robustness (up to 64.92% improvement in accuracy and 62.27% reduction in attack success rate). For out-of-distribution datasets (AeroEngQA, CPIQA) we see similar adversarial robustness from our hybrid model (up to 57.14% improvement in accuracy). For prompt injection (SafeGuard) and jailbreak detection (AdvBench, DAN) datasets our hybrid model is also very strong (up to 51% reduction in attack success rate compared to state of the art baseline models). Overall, our results show that combining entropy, uncertainty and geometric features provides a more effective defence strategy than using any single feature alone for both in-domain and out-of-distribution tasks.

High-throughput microscopy generates large, structured datasets capturing cellular responses to pharmacological perturbations, but accessing these datasets typically requires SQL expertise. Large language models offer a natural-language alternative, yet their tendency to hallucinate raises concerns about result reliability . We present SANE Schema-Aware Natural-language Evaluation, a novel paradigm for domain-specific text-to-SQL evaluation: schema-grounded, automatically generated benchmarks tied to real and specific experimental structure. SANE makes evaluation more scalable, systematic, and reproducible. Using SANE, we evaluate a few-shot large language model and show that, under constrained schemas with structured prompting and guardrails, accurate query generation is achievable without any model training or fine-tuning. Most failures stem from ambiguous or underspecified inputs and manifest as overly cautious clarification requests or answers to queries that should first be disambiguated, rather than incorrect SQL generation. These results indicate that few-shot large language models can provide reliable database access in well-defined domains when combined with schema-aware prompting.

Sociotechnical alignment concerns the social desirability of AI behavior and is thus inherently normative, not merely technical. While NLP research increasingly addresses its technical aspects, it often leaves underspecified what such "social desirability" entails. We argue that this reflects a fundamental gap: the absence of a systematic way to specify how sociotechnical alignment defines, justifies, and evaluates socially desirable AI behavior. To address this gap, we introduce a human-centered framework for specifying sociotechnical alignment. We draw on social-scientific accounts of sociobehavioral desirability to ground the basis for behavioral desirability judgments and use this framework to analyze how alignment is specified in practice. Our systematic literature review identifies recurring patterns: normative concepts grounding desirability judgments are often unspecified or conflated with alignment targets for (desired) system behavior, target populations are underdefined, and design choices are rarely theoretically justified. These findings point to a lack of conceptual specificity that limits cumulative progress. We therefore offer recommendations that link social-scientific frameworks to alignment design choices, supporting more conceptually precise approaches to sociotechnical alignment.

During the recent years, the use of linguistic data for language processing increased progressively. Such data are now commonly called language resources. Most of the language resources used for this purpose are collections of texts as the Brown Corpus and the Penn Treebank, but electronic lexicons (WordNet, FrameNet, VerbNet, ComLex, Lexicon-Grammar...) and formal grammars (TAG...) developed recently. Most processes of construction of lexicons and grammars are manual, whereas the construction of corpora has always been highly automated. However, more and more specialists of language processing realize that the information content of lexicons and grammars is richer than that of corpora, and hence the former make more elaborate processing possible. The difference in construction time is likely to be connected with the difference in information content: the handcrafting of lexicons and grammars by linguists would make them more informative than automatically generated data. This situation can evolve into two directions: either specialists of language technology get progressively used to handling manually constructed resources, which are more informative and more complex, or the process of construction of lexicons and grammars is automated and industrialized, which is the mainstream perspective. Both evolutions are already in progress, and a tension exists between them. The relation between linguists and computer scientists depends on the future of these evolutions, since the first implies training and hiring numerous linguists, whereas the other depends essentially on solutions elaborated by computer engineers. The aim of this article is to analyse practical examples of the language resources in question, and to discuss about which of the two trends, handcrafting or generating industrially, or a combination of both, can give the best results or is the most realistic.

Frontier LLMs perform well in Western contexts, but remain poorly tested on underrepresented cultures such as those in Southeast Asia (SEA). Existing NLI benchmarks are largely Western-centric, translation-derived, or monolingual, limiting their ability to measure culturally grounded reasoning. We introduce SEA-NLI, a native, culturally grounded NLI benchmark covering eight SEA countries in English and native regional languages, verified by native speakers. Across 17 encoder and decoder models, we observe a low performance from all models, especially for knowledge-intensive categories such as Languages and Science and Technology. Our analysis shows that failure cases mainly stem from missing SEA cultural knowledge: SEA-adapted models and culture-aware prompting improve performance, while CoT prompting offers limited gains.

African languages have very little labelled data, and it is unclear if augmenting the quantity of annotation data reliably enhances downstream performance. The study is a systematic sample-size scaling study of natural language inference (NLI) on 16 African languages based on the AfriXNLI benchmark. Under controlled conditions, two multilingual transformer models with roughly 0.6B parameters XLM-R Large fine-tuned on XNLI and AfroXLM-R Large are tested on sample sizes of between 50 and 500 labeled examples and average their results across random subsampling runs. As opposed to the usual belief of monotonic increase with increased data, we find a strongly language sensitive and often non-monotonic scaling behavior. Some languages show early saturation or decrease in performance with sample size as well as high variance in low resource regimes. These results indicate that the volume of data is not enough to guarantee stable profits to African NLI, creating the necessity of language sensitive datasets creation and stronger multi-lingual modelling strategies.

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in healthcare, yet they still encounter significant challenges in complex clinical decision-making scenarios. Existing benchmarks primarily assess LLM performance in single-course settings and lack systematic evaluation in multi-course scenarios, where a patient's condition evolves over time. To address this gap, we propose ClinicalMC, a benchmark for multi-course clinical decision-making. It includes 1,275 Chinese and 5,804 English samples across four stages from admission to discharge. These stages cover triage, first-course examination/diagnosis/treatment, subsequent multi-course examination/assessment/treatment, and final diagnosis. In ClinicalMC, patients in the English dataset undergo an average of 5.11 clinical courses, whereas those in the Chinese dataset undergo 3.42. To assess LLM performance, we construct a multi-agent evaluation framework that includes patient, examiner, and doctor agents. Based on the benchmark and framework, we design two experimental settings -- a single-turn static setting and a multi-turn dynamic setting -- and assess three categories of LLMs: 1) closed-source LLMs like GPT5-mini; 2) open-source LLMs like DeepSeek-V3.2; and 3) medical LLMs like HuatuoGPT-o1. Through extensive evaluation, we aim to better understand LLM performance in the medical domain and support its effective deployment in healthcare.

Text embeddings are fundamental to many downstream applications, making robustness important for real-world NLP. However, most recent state-of-the-art embedding models are not reproducible because they rely on closed or undisclosed training data, and they remain insufficiently robust for Southeast Asian languages. We present SEA-LION-Embedding, a fully open and reproducible text-embedding pipeline for Southeast Asian languages trained only on publicly available data, and use it to study three core factors of robust embedding design: data composition, training objective, and base encoder initialization. SEA-LION-Embedding achieves state-of-the-art results on SEA-BED while enabling systematic and reproducible analysis of robust text embeddings for the region.

Human annotation is the empirical foundation of much NLP research, from dataset construction to model evaluation, but papers often leave unclear who produced the annotations and how the annotation process was controlled. We provide the first large-scale, task-level audit of human annotation reporting across major NLP venues, asking which annotation details are documented, which are missing, and how reporting varies across time, topic, venue, and intended use of human judgment. We introduce a unified taxonomy of annotation-reporting practices and validate an LLM-assisted extraction pipeline against Annotated-gold, a human-adjudicated gold standard of 41 papers and 72 annotation tasks, where the best model reaches human-comparable agreement with adjudicated labels, with Krippendorff's alpha of 0.606 versus 0.585 for human-human agreement. Using this pipeline, we construct Annotated-llm, a dataset covering ACL-venue papers from 2018-2025, with 2,667 extracted annotation tasks from 1,603 papers, and find that papers frequently report operational details such as recruitment strategies, annotator expertise, and annotation volume, but often omit details needed to assess annotation validity, including training, language proficiency, compensation, socio-demographics, adjudication, and agreement values, especially in model-evaluation studies. Our results show that annotation reporting in NLP has improved over time but remains uneven, and they establish a scalable framework and bare-minimum reporting recommendations for making human annotation more reliable, reproducible, and interpretable.

Transformer models dominate modern NLP, but efficient, language-specific models remain scarce. In Portuguese, most focus on scale or accuracy, often neglecting training and deployment efficiency. In the present work, we introduce PortBERT, a family of RoBERTa-based language models for Portuguese, designed to balance performance and efficiency. Trained from scratch on over 450 GB of deduplicated and filtered mC4 and OSCAR23 from CulturaX using fairseq, PortBERT leverages byte-level BPE tokenization and stable pre-training routines across both GPU and TPU processors. We release two variants, PortBERT base and PortBERT large, and evaluate them on ExtraGLUE, a suite of translated GLUE and SuperGLUE tasks. Both models perform competitively, matching or surpassing existing monolingual and multilingual models. Beyond accuracy, we report training and inference times as well as fine-tuning throughput, providing practical insights into model efficiency. PortBERT thus complements prior work by addressing the underexplored dimension of compute-performance tradeoffs in Portuguese NLP. We release all models on Huggingface and provide fairseq checkpoints to support further research and applications.

Schema-constrained information extraction from diverse educational and labor-market corpora remains an open challenge in natural language processing because existing pipelines rely primarily on lexical-surface methods that cannot recover implicit competencies, lack grounding in shared taxonomies, and provide no formal measures of extraction reliability or document-level completeness. To address these limitations, this paper proposes a four-stage NLP framework that combines (i) schema-constrained prompting of a two-model frontier-LLM ensemble against a JSON Schema-enforced seven-slot competency formalism, (ii) Sentence-BERT (SBERT) alignment of the extracted records against an eleven-domain ESCO v1.2.1 controlled vocabulary, (iii) a two-tier adjudication protocol that resolves inter-model disagreements, and (iv) a verification mechanism that combines per-slot Cohen's kappa, schema conformance, and document-level completeness audits. The framework is instantiated for a critical application in higher-education quality assurance, namely curriculum-labor market alignment for the ABET-accredited BSc Computer Science program at the United Arab Emirates University. The pipeline extracts 400 competency records from the 85-course 2025-2026 study plan and aligns them, under a five-scope analysis ranging from the computing core to a probability-weighted student trajectory, with 30 job postings (483 requirement clauses) at an SBERT cosine threshold of 0.50. The extractor achieves Cohen's kappa of 0.79 on the skill slot, with 100% schema conformance and 100% document-level completeness. The alignment surfaces interpretable supply-demand gaps of 25.0% in general and transversal skills, 13.8% in algorithms and computational theory, and 12.2% in software engineering and project management, with a near-zero 1.8% gap in artificial intelligence and data science despite 38.6% supply coverage.

The increasing application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in healthcare demands language models specifically attuned to the complexities of clinical language. This work introduces KliniskVestBERT, a suite of three BERT-based encoder models pre-trained on a substantial corpus of real-world, de-identified Norwegian clinical texts from Helse Vest. We continue pretraining existing language models Nb-BERT-large, NorBERT3-large, and ModernBERT on our specialized clinical dataset. This dataset is based on a representative population of Helse Vest patients. The included document types are carefully curated to encompass a broad clinical spectrum in bokmål and nynorsk including discharge summaries, surgical reports, nursing notes etc. ensuring comprehensive representation of the linguistic landscape within Norwegian healthcare settings. Evaluation on three synthtetic Norwegian clinical benchmark datasets and two real-world problems demonstrates that each of our clinically specialized models consistently outperforms their baseline counterparts, highlighting the significant benefit of domain-specific pre-training for NLP tasks within the clinical domain. The project was a joint effort by all Helse Vest entities (Helse Bergen, Helse Fonna, Helse Førde and Helse Stavanger) with DIPS under the project lead of Helse Vest ICT.

This paper offers a call to action. We urge our colleagues in the research community to play a greater role in the articulation of our findings to the public. To illustrate the stakes we present a case study on the initial stages of an LLM-based machine translation application's deployment in a real-world context: a text-2-911 system advertising capabilities in 55 languages for use in emergencies in which it may be difficult to call operators directly. We identify a number of common misconceptions about technologies such as these, concluding with a set of concrete recommendations and best practices for stakeholders at every stage of the development and deployment pipeline. While the advancement of scientific research often lies in solving the "hard" problems, we argue it is often the "easy" ones -- problems for which the latest technology is often unnecessary -- that are most overlooked.

Human disagreement is ubiquitous and well-known in labeling. However, variation in explanations, captured through token-level human rationales, remains far less explored. At the same time, it is unclear how to best evaluate human labels and rationales -- or even how to best aggregate rationales beyond majority vote -- in light of this variation. Yet, rationales may provide additional insights into the richness of human reasoning, that may differ in style, values and interpretations -- especially in subjective NLP tasks like hate speech detection. In this work, we unify diverse models, training strategies, loss functions, and existing evaluation metrics under a single protocol by systematically re-implementing them across different label and rationale representation spaces. Classification metrics are organized around two key properties -- predictive and distributional -- while explainability metrics through three complementary dimensions: plausibility, faithfulness, and complexity. In this unified supervision framework, we evaluate model behavior across classification and explainability metrics, as well as metric sensitivity to the choice of label (hard and soft) and rationale representation space (hard, intermediate and soft). Results show that both hard and soft metrics favor softer representations, highlighting their effectiveness in capturing variation and the need to rethink evaluation in subjective NLP.

While platforms like Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar track citations for academic papers, no comparable infrastructure exists for monitoring dataset usage in research literature, leaving the landscape of data use largely opaque. Addressing this gap is critical for transparency, reproducibility, and monitoring of impact, yet progress is hindered by inconsistent citation practices, scarce labeled data, and ambiguous references to datasets in the wild. Traditional NLP approaches struggle with these challenges, motivating the shift toward more adaptive, semantically rich models. Building on prior work using LLMs for data mention detection and synthetic data for bootstrapping training, this paper presents an updated methodology for scalable dataset monitoring. We introduce a multitask GLiNER-based framework that jointly performs dataset mention extraction, relation identification, and usage-context classification. To address label scarcity, the pipeline leverages synthetic data generation to produce training examples and LLM-based revalidation to filter incorrect mentions and enforce labeling consistency, together improving reliability, coverage, and output consistency across the training pipeline. This work advances the development of open-source tools for monitoring data use in research literature, contributing to the broader goal of generalizable, unconstrained dataset citation tracking.

Data quality is a critical factor in the effectiveness of machine learning models. Label errors, present even in widely used benchmarks, introduce noise into training data and reduce model generalization. In this work, we conduct a comparative analysis of two automatic label error detection methods - Confident Learning and Dataset Cartography - on three Russian text classification corpora of varying size, number of classes, and domain: ru_emotion_e-culture (49,123 examples, emotion classification), RuCoLA (8,524 examples, linguistic acceptability), and TERRa (2,337 examples, textual entailment recognition). We use the pre-trained rubert-base-cased model fine-tuned on each corpus. To verify the meaningfulness of filtering, we conduct control experiments with random removal of an equivalent number of examples. Results show that the effectiveness of both methods depends strongly on dataset characteristics: on large corpora with low noise levels, filtering does not improve performance, while on small datasets with high noise, Confident Learning achieves a significant F1-macro improvement. Dataset Cartography demonstrates more conservative behavior, removing fewer examples. Across all corpora, targeted removal by both methods outperforms random removal, confirming the meaningfulness of the approaches.

Legal NLP benchmarks overwhelmingly evaluate a single language or aggregate tasks that differ fundamentally across jurisdictions, making cross-lingual comparison impossible. We introduce Multi-Legal-Bench, the first cross-jurisdictional legal benchmark that evaluates identical tasks across six countries (Ukraine, France, Netherlands, Poland, Czech Republic, Lithuania), four language families, and 134 million court decisions. The benchmark defines five tasks court-type classification, judgment form classification, case-outcome prediction, legal norm extraction, and cause category prediction mapped to structured metadata from national court registries, forming a deliberately sparse 5x6 task-jurisdiction matrix (20 of 30 cells filled). We evaluate 7 frontier LLMs under zero-shot and 3-shot prompting via AWS Bedrock, with 4 additional small/medium models (3-12B) for scaling analysis. Our results reveal that: (1) task-dependent few-shot effects discovered in Ukrainian replicate across all jurisdictions; (2) no single model dominates any language rankings shift with both task and jurisdiction; (3) cross-lingual few-shot transfer does not follow language proximity: UA->FR (Romance, -2.1 pp) transfers better than UA->PL (Slavic, -13.7 pp), with label-set alignment predicting transfer quality better than language family; and (4) tokenizer fertility, despite a 2.3x spread, does not significantly predict cross-lingual accuracy (r=-0.27, p=0.14), suggesting that model architecture and pretraining data dominate tokenizer efficiency. We release all data, prompts, and model predictions.

Legal NLP benchmarks are overwhelmingly English-centric, leaving failure modes in morphologically rich, non-Latin-script languages undetected. We introduce UA-Legal-Bench, a five-task benchmark for evaluating large language models on Ukrainian legal reasoning, built from the Unified State Register of Court Decisions (EDRSR) -- one of the world's largest open judicial corpora (99.5 million decisions). The benchmark comprises: (1) case-type classification (4 classes, n=2,000), (2) judgment form classification (4 classes, n=2,000), (3) case-outcome prediction (6 classes, n=800), (4) legal norm extraction (n=1,794), and (5) cause category prediction (22 classes, n=1,871). We evaluate 11 LLMs (3B--675B) from five families under zero-shot and 3-shot prompting via AWS Bedrock with 158K API calls. Our results reveal sharply task-dependent few-shot effects: few-shot prompting improves judgment form classification by up to +38.6 pp but has mixed effects on outcome prediction. We show that accuracy is misleading on imbalanced legal tasks: the model with highest COP accuracy (62%) is a majority-class predictor (macro-F1: 23%), while the genuinely best model scores only 44% macro-F1. Within-family scaling analysis reveals that 8B models can match frontier performance on surface-level tasks but scaling thresholds vary dramatically across families. We release all data, prompts, and model predictions.

A retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system deployed over a multi-author institutional corpus can give a different answer to the same question depending on which source it retrieves -- a failure mode the dominant single-gold-answer paradigm cannot diagnose. We argue that source-dependence is a missing axis of NLP evaluation, and that auditing it means shifting the unit of evaluation from answer correctness to the inter-source relationship. We make this concrete in transplant patient education, where institutional sources demonstrably disagree, releasing three artefacts: TransplantQA, a benchmark of real patient questions, each answered by grounding generation in multiple institutional handbooks as candidate sources; HERO-QA, a hierarchical retrieval strategy that grounds and audits each answer; and a structured-output judge that scores inter-source relationships on a validated 5-label taxonomy. At scale, better retrieval reveals far more disagreement than prior estimates suggested -- understating its prevalence, not its intensity. The framework is domain-agnostic and transfers to legal and educational RAG: measuring source-dependence is a responsibility for deployed multi-source NLP generally.

Large language model (LLM) leaderboards rank AI models using standardized benchmarks and have become highly visible across computer science, despite known limitations in their reliability and robustness. Yet how they shape researchers' actual practice remains empirically uncharted. We address this gap through semi-structured interviews with eight researchers across four computer science subfields, analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. We find a near-universal paradox of pragmatic skepticism: while participants expressed deep distrust of leaderboard rankings, they continued to use them as rough decision-making aids. Peer networks, not leaderboards, emerged as the primary model selection mechanism, and arena-based (human-voting) leaderboards were consistently preferred over static benchmark leaderboards. Leaderboard influence varied sharply across subfields, revealing that disciplinary culture, not individual attitudes, mediates engagement; for instance, NLP researchers faced state-of-the-art comparison pressure while HCI and Systems/Privacy researchers reported none. Across these differences, however, participants converged on cost transparency as the most demanded missing feature (seven of eight). We translate these findings into concrete design recommendations that align evaluation infrastructure with how researchers actually use it, such as task-specific score breakdowns, cost integration, and voter-demographic disclosure.

Fine-tuning large-scale pre-trained models is a recent prevalent paradigm for adapting general representations to specialized tasks. However, when a new version of a pre-trained model becomes available, expertise acquired through fine-tuning cannot be directly reused because it is tied to the parameterization of the original model, requiring another costly fine-tuning. To address this inefficiency, recent work uses task vectors, defined as the parameter difference between a fine-tuned model and its base model, to transfer expertise across models. While existing methods bridge disparate models by matching activations or gradients, a significant performance gap remains relative to direct fine-tuning, suggesting that these partial correspondences are insufficient. In this work, instead of viewing a task vector merely as a parameter offset, we revisit the formation of task vectors and show that they can be derived as accumulated bilinear interactions between input-side activations and output-side gradients. Motivated by this observation, we formulate task-vector transfer as a dual-space alignment problem and propose BiCo, a training-free framework for transferring task vectors through Bilinear Coordinate alignment. BiCo estimates orthogonal Procrustes mappings in both spaces using a single forward-backward pass on a small calibration set, without any parameter update. Across extensive computer vision and natural language processing benchmarks, BiCo consistently outperforms existing transfer methods across models that differ in width, depth, and pre-training configuration.

Prion diseases are rare, rapidly progressive, and fatal neurodegenerative disorders that remain difficult to diagnose, particularly in their early stages because of nonspecific clinical presentations. However, to our knowledge, there is no publicly available prion-disease-focused dataset designed to capture a broad range of clinically relevant entities from the biomedical literature. We introduce PrionNER, a manually annotated named entity recognition dataset for prion disease clinical information in PubMed abstracts. The current release comprises 317 abstracts, 2,943 sentences, and 6,955 text-bound entity annotations spanning 15 coarse-grained and 31 fine-grained clinically oriented entity types covering diseases, symptoms, diagnostics, findings, anatomy, treatments, and temporal and statistical evidence. Inter-annotator agreement reaches 81.78 exact-match F1, indicating strong annotation consistency. We benchmark supervised BERT baselines, W2NER, and zero-shot extractors on PrionNER. W2NER is the strongest supervised model, and Gemma-4-31B is the strongest zero-shot model, but the benchmark remains challenging, especially for structurally complex mentions and fine-grained clinically adjacent label distinctions. PrionNER provides a clinically grounded benchmark for prion-disease information extraction and supports research on rare-disease biomedical NLP under low-resource, fine-grained, and non-flat extraction conditions. The dataset, annotation guidelines, and evaluation scripts are available at https://github.com/daotuanan/PrionNER/.

Explaining the predictions of neural models in clinical NLP remains a significant challenge, especially for complex tasks involving long, unstructured medical texts. While post-hoc methods like LIME and SHAP are widely used, they often fall short when applied to clinical narratives. In this paper, we identify core limitations of token-level and perturbation-based explanation techniques through targeted demonstra- tions on a hospital length-of-stay prediction task. Our findings reveal issues such as overemphasis on non-informative tokens, instability in at- tributions, and high-confidence predictions for incoherent input variants. These results underscore the need for explanation strategies that are clin- ically meaningful, semantically grounded, and robust to linguistic noise.

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).

Entity linking is a key component of many downstream NLP systems, yet existing approaches are often tied to the specific target knowledge bases and domains, limiting their real world application. In this paper, we extend LELA, a modular and domain-agnostic LLM-based entity disambiguation method, into a practical Python library that integrates zero-shot Named Entity Recognition (NER) -thereby providing a complete end-toend pipeline for entity-linking in real-world usage. We provide experimental results validating LELA's performance and robustness across diverse entity linking settings. In our demo, users can play with the system on their own input texts.

Computing legal indicators from normative texts is a key task in legal monitoring and policy evaluation, but presents significant challenges due to the complexity, scale, and interpretive nature of legal language, as well as the variability in available document quality. Existing natural language processing techniques and generative models can assist in legal analysis, but often suffer from high risk of hallucinations and lack the interpretability and evidence grounding required for reliable indicator computation. This paper presents N2I-RAG (From Norms to Indicators), an agentic retrieval-augmented generation framework designed to automate the computation of legal indicators in a transparent and traceable way. We integrate adaptive retrieval, llm-based agents, and validation mechanisms in a modular pipeline, where each component performs a defined role in filtering, retrieving, and assessing evidence, and in producing binary legal outcomes linked to identifiable legal provisions. The framework emphasizes traceability by requiring explicit explanations of intermediate decisions and final indicator assignments. We evaluate N2I-RAG using an in-house constructed French marine environmental law corpus that includes both scanned and digital sources. Comparative experiments with multiple language model families demonstrate that the proposed approach consistently outperforms baseline systems, and generalizes well when tested on 2 different bans. The results indicate that agentic retrieval-augmented generation can bridge open-text legal language and standardized indicator computation, offering a foundation for transparent and scalable legal observatories.

This paper presents a multilingual customer service self-help corpus comprising 1,122 manually validated documents in Finnish, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish, totaling 274,599 words and 1,884,833 characters. The documents have been sourced from the public self-help pages of four Nordic telecommunications operators and subsequently filtered for person-identifiable information and relevance through a combined LLM and human annotation pipeline. Domain-specific datasets for Nordic languages remain scarce, particularly in customer service: a domain of growing importance for retrieval-augmented generation, cross-lingual transfer learning, and emerging agent-based service architectures. An analysis of the corpus reveals substantial variation in document length and structure across operators, reflecting distinct editorial strategies, as well as broad topical coverage spanning network hardware, mobile services, TV and streaming, billing, and account management. The dataset is publicly available under a CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 license at https://zenodo.org/records/20732652, intended to support reproducible research in Nordic NLP and information retrieval.

Natural language conveys information at varying levels of granularity, from fine-grained references to broad descriptions. While granularity is fundamental to human communication, existing measures mostly capture surface detail or sentence specificity. We introduce Granuscore, a reference-free measure of granularity that leverages structural properties of a hierarchical embedding space. Granuscore reliably recovers hierarchical orderings on the Granola-EQ dataset and captures expected differences in granularity across discourse contexts. Across domains, we further show that Granuscore explains non-linear variation in sentence specificity beyond sentence length. Finally, we apply Granuscore to four question-answering benchmarks and analyze how granularity differs for questions, gold answers, and model outputs across response outcomes. The analysis reveals consistent differences in model behavior and provides a principled lens for characterizing the difficulty of QA datasets. Together, the results position Granuscore as a scalable, broadly applicable tool for analyzing granularity in text.

Existing financial NLP benchmarks often rely on labels supplied by outside observers, measuring how language is perceived rather than what speakers have committed to in the market. We introduce StakeBench, an evaluation framework for language understanding grounded in market commitment. StakeBench links 560,876 comments from 2,261 resolved markets to verified position, action, and market-odds records across Polymarket and Manifold. Supervision is derived from observable market behavior. Position sides, post-comment trading actions, and market-odds trajectories replace human annotation. Four diagnostic tasks test whether models detect market commitment, identify the revealed side, anticipate future action, and perform collective odds projection. Three commitment-aware metrics measure alignment with revealed preferences rather than perceived sentiment. Validity audits and explicit interpretation boundaries help distinguish observable commitment signals from latent belief and causal market-odds impact. Across 15 LLMs and 18 topics and platform settings, models partially recover position-side signals, with Directed Accuracy from 0.506 to 0.599, but show structural failures on later tasks. Ten of the fifteen models collapse to one or two action labels in future action anticipation, and no model consistently improves on the naive odds-direction baseline in collective odds projection. Model scale is not correlated with performance, finance-domain tuning does not improve revealed-side identification, and platform incentives strongly shape higher-order results. StakeBench is packaged with evaluation code and dataset under CC-BY 4.0.

Large language models are widely deployed in high-stakes NLP tasks, yet risks such as bias, hallucination, adversarial vulnerability and unreliable generalization remain. Probe-based auditing reveals inconsistencies in model behavior. Adversarial text generation uncovers robustness gaps, especially in lower-resourced languages with limited benchmarks. Enterprise text-to-SQL settings expose the difficulty of validating outputs over private and large-scale databases. Human supervision is essential for probe validation, adversarial verification and domain-specific annotation, but it is costly and hard to scale. This survey examines recent human-in-the-loop methods that shift NLP from automation toward collaboration for safety and trustworthiness. We review how human expertise supports auditing, robustness evaluation, data construction and model steering. Our findings highlight gaps in scalable probing, sustainable robustness benchmarks, low-resource settings and governance of private systems. We outline practical research directions for adaptive auditing, collaborative evaluation and accountable deployment.