United States

Meta-evaluation of automatic evaluation metrics---assessing evaluation metrics themselves---is crucial for accurately benchmarking natural language processing systems and has implications for scientific inquiry, production model development, and policy enforcement. While existing approaches to metric meta-evaluation focus on general statements about the absolute and relative quality of metrics across arbitrary system outputs, in practice, metrics are applied in highly contextual settings, often measuring the performance for a highly constrained set of system outputs. For example, we may only be interested in evaluating a specific model or class of models. We introduce a method for contextual metric meta-evaluation by comparing the local metric accuracy of evaluation metrics. Across translation, speech recognition, and ranking tasks, we demonstrate that the local metric accuracies vary both in absolute value and relative effectiveness as we shift across evaluation contexts. This observed variation highlights the importance of adopting context-specific metric evaluations over global ones.

NAACL 2025

Contextual Metric Meta-Evaluation by Measuring Local Metric Accuracy

meta-evaluation

evaluation

metrics

### Welcome!
The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. Our Virtual Poster Sessions will take place online Thursday, August 22, 2024.

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.aclweb.org/registration). **

If you have already registered, please check your inbox for an email from Underline granting you access to ACL 2024 content.

Please register!

ACL 2024

The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. More information will be announced soon.

poster

### Welcome to 2025 Annual Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Welcome to the 2025 meeting of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics! I am proud to help organize the first NAACL conference to carry the new name of our organization, one that emphasizes inclusion for all of the Americas. I am also pleased to welcome you to Albuquerque, New Mexico, a state whose unique blend of cultural influences will make for an excellent backdrop for NAACL 2025, especially with this year’s special theme on NLP in a Multicultural World. 
**[Continue reading...](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jX-qGhqVSZZCIrAnJaz798pflu5Irrdn/view?usp=sharing)**

*- Colin Cherry, Google, NAACL 2025 General Chair* 

[![](https://assets.underline.io/markdown_image/1/image/b087f8a4dc5816d6e1a6514e59c59ac3.png)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T96GzPqObXrMln2BMByCSXTSizjTg69P/view?usp=sharing)

You need to log in with the email address you registered with. Access credentials have been sent to your email. 

Please be sure to check your spam and other email folders if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in to explore this event.

To access NAACL 2025 event page you are required to register. Please follow [**this link**](https://2025.naacl.org/registration/registration/) to register. Access will depend on your registration type.

Welcome to 2025 Annual Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Document Visual Question Answering (VQA) models have evolved at an impressive rate over the past few years, coming close to or matching human performance on some benchmarks. We argue that common evaluation metrics used by popular benchmarks do not account for the semantic and multimodal groundedness of a model's outputs. As a result, hallucinations and major semantic errors are treated the same way as well-grounded outputs, and the evaluation scores do not reflect the reasoning capabilities of the model. In response, we propose a new evaluation methodology that accounts for the groundedness of predictions with regard to the semantic characteristics of the output as well as the multimodal placement of the output within the input document. Our proposed methodology is parameterized in such a way that users can configure the score according to their preferences. We validate our scoring methodology using human judgment and show its potential impact on existing popular leaderboards. Through extensive analyses, we demonstrate that our proposed method produces scores that are a better indicator of a model's robustness and tends to give higher rewards to better-calibrated answers.

Where is this coming from? Making groundedness count in the evaluation of Document VQA models

Despite the massive advancements in large language models (LLMs), they still suffer from producing plausible but incorrect responses. To improve the reliability of LLMs, recent research has focused on uncertainty quantification to predict whether a response is correct or not. However, most uncertainty quantification methods have been evaluated on single-labeled questions, which removes data uncertainty—the irreducible randomness often present in user queries, which can arise from factors like multiple possible answers. This limitation may cause uncertainty quantification results to be unreliable in practical settings. In this paper, we investigate previous uncertainty quantification methods under the presence of data uncertainty. Our contributions are two-fold: 1) proposing a new Multi-Answer Question Answering dataset, **MAQA**, consisting of world knowledge, mathematical reasoning, and commonsense reasoning tasks to evaluate uncertainty quantification regarding data uncertainty, and 2) assessing 5 uncertainty quantification methods of diverse white- and black-box LLMs. Our findings show that previous methods relatively struggle compared to single-answer settings, though this varies depending on the task. Moreover, we observe that entropy- and consistency-based methods effectively estimate model uncertainty, even in the presence of data uncertainty.

MAQA: Evaluating Uncertainty Quantification in LLMs Regarding Data Uncertainty

Instruction following is a core capability of modern Large language models (LLMs), making evaluating this capability essential to understanding these models. The Instruction Following Evaluation (IFEval) benchmark from the literature does this using objective criteria, offering a measure of LLM performance without subjective AI or human judgement. However, it only includes English instructions, limiting its ability to assess LLMs in other languages. We propose the Multilingual Instruction Following Evaluation (M-IFEval) benchmark, expanding the evaluation to French, Japanese, and Spanish, with both general and language-specific instructions. Applying this benchmark to 8 state-of-the-art LLMs, we find that benchmark performance across languages and instruction types can vary widely, underscoring the importance of a multilingual benchmark for evaluating LLMs in a diverse cultural context.

M-IFEval: Multilingual Instruction-Following Evaluation

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as an approach to augment large language models (LLMs) by reducing their reliance on static knowledge and improving answer factuality. RAG retrieves relevant context snippets and generates an answer based on them. Despite its increasing industrial adoption, systematic exploration of RAG components is lacking, particularly regarding the ideal size of provided context, and the choice of base LLM and retrieval method. To help guide development of robust RAG systems, we evaluate various context sizes, BM25 and semantic search as retrievers, and eight base LLMs. Moving away from the usual RAG evaluation with short answers, we explore the more challenging long-form question answering in two domains, where a good answer has to utilize the entire context. Our findings indicate that final QA performance improves steadily with up to 15 snippets but stagnates or declines beyond that. Finally, we show that different general-purpose LLMs excel in the biomedical domain than the encyclopedic one, and that open-domain evidence retrieval in large corpora is challenging.

On the Influence of Context Size and Model Choice in Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems

As premodern texts are passed down over centuries, errors inevitably accrue. These errors can be challenging to identify, as some have survived undetected for so long precisely because they are so elusive. While prior work has evaluated error detection methods on artificially-generated errors, we introduce the first dataset of real errors in premodern Greek, enabling the evaluation of error detection methods on errors that genuinely accumulated at some stage in the centuries-long copying process. To create this dataset, we use metrics derived from BERT conditionals to sample 1,000 words more likely to contain errors, which are then annotated and labeled by a domain expert as errors or not. We then propose and evaluate new error detection methods and find that our discriminator-based detector outperforms all other methods, improving the true positive rate for classifying real errors by 5%. We additionally observe that scribal errors are more difficult to detect than print or digitization errors. Our dataset enables the evaluation of error detection methods on real errors in premodern texts for the first time, providing a benchmark for developing more effective error detection algorithms to assist scholars in restoring premodern works.

An Annotated Dataset of Errors in Premodern Greek and Baselines for Detecting Them

At the forefront of state-of-the-art human alignment methods are preference optimization methods (*PO). Prior research has often concentrated on identifying the best-performing method, typically involving a grid search over hyperparameters, which can be impractical for general practitioners. In this paper, we examine the robustness of existing state-of-the-art methods to varying hyperparameters in a realistic out-of-distribution (OOD) scenario that mirrors real-world applications of human alignment. Our goal is to empirically find the method that increases the likelihood of achieving better results through the lens of various metrics, such as KL divergence and response length. We also introduce LN-DPO, a simple length-normalized version of DPO that is more stable across hyperparameters, effectively reduces the average response length, and improves performance. Our analysis of state-of-the-art reference-free (i.e., SimPO) and reference-dependent (i.e., DPO and LN-DPO) methods reveals that they perform similarly at their peak (i.e., best possible scenario). However, we uncover that the pattern of change in performance greatly varies as we move away from the best possible scenario.

A Practical Analysis of Human Alignment with *PO

Creating globally inclusive AI systems demands datasets reflecting diverse social norms. Iran, with its unique cultural blend, offers an ideal case study, with Farsi adding linguistic complexity. In this work, we introduce the Iranian Social Norms (ISN) dataset, a novel collection of 1,699 Iranian social norms, including environments, demographic features, and scope annotation, alongside English translations. Our evaluation of 6 Large Language Models (LLMs) in classifying Iranian social norms, using a variety of prompts, uncovered critical insights into the impact of geographic and linguistic context. Results revealed a substantial performance gap in LLMs' comprehension of Iranian norms. Notably, while the geographic context in English prompts enhanced the performance, this effect was absent in Farsi, pointing to nuanced linguistic challenges. Particularly, performance was significantly worse for Iran-specific norms, emphasizing the importance of culturally tailored datasets. As the first Farsi dataset for social norm classification, ISN will facilitate crucial cross-cultural analyses, shedding light on how values differ across contexts and cultures.

Can I Introduce My Boyfriend to My Grandmother? Evaluating Large Language Models Capabilities on Iranian Social Norm Classification

Knowledge probing evaluates to which extent a language model (LM) has acquired relational knowledge during its pre-training phase. It provides a cost-effective means of comparing LMs of different sizes and training setups and is useful for monitoring knowledge gained or lost during continual learning (CL). In prior work, we presented an improved knowledge probe called BEAR (Wiland et al., 2024), which enables the comparison of LMs trained with different pre-training objectives (causal and masked LMs) and addresses issues of skewed distributions in previous probes to deliver a more unbiased reading of LM knowledge. With this paper, we present LM-Pub-Quiz, a Python framework and leaderboard built around the BEAR probing mechanism that enables researchers and practitioners to apply it in their work. It provides options for standalone evaluation and direct integration into the widely-used training pipeline of the Hugging Face transformers library. Further, it provides a fine-grained analysis of different knowledge types to assist users in better understanding the knowledge in each evaluated LM. We publicly release LM-Pub-Quiz as an open-source project.


https://lm-pub-quiz.github.io/

LM-Pub-Quiz: A Comprehensive Framework for Zero-Shot Evaluation of Relational Knowledge in Language Models

As large language models (LLMs) continue to evolve, leaderboards play a significant role in steering their development. Existing leaderboards often prioritize model capabilities while overlooking safety concerns, leaving a significant gap in responsible AI development. To address this gap, we introduce Libra-Leaderboard, a comprehensive framework designed to rank LLMs through a balanced evaluation of performance and safety. Combining a dynamic leaderboard with an interactive LLM arena, Libra-Leaderboard encourages the joint optimization of capability and safety. Unlike traditional approaches that average performance and safety metrics, Libra-Leaderboard uses a distance-to-optimal-score method to calculate the overall rankings. This approach incentivizes models to achieve a balance rather than excelling in one dimension at the expense of some other ones. In the first release, Libra-Leaderboard evaluates 26 mainstream LLMs from 14 leading organizations, identifying critical safety challenges even in state-of-the-art models.

Libra-Leaderboard: Towards Responsible AI through a Balanced Leaderboard of Safety and Capability

Previous research has shown that fine-tuning language models on general tasks enhance their underlying mechanisms. However, the impact of fine-tuning on poisoned data and the resulting changes in these mechanisms are poorly understood. This study investigates the changes in a model's mechanisms during toxic fine-tuning and identifies the primary corruption mechanisms. We also analyze the changes after retraining a corrupted model on the original dataset and observe neuroplasticity behaviors, where the model relearns original mechanisms after fine-tuning the corrupted model. Our findings indicate that; (i) Underlying mechanisms are amplified across task-specific fine-tuning which can be generalized to longer epochs, (ii) Model corruption via toxic fine-tuning is localized to specific circuit components, (iii) Models exhibit neuroplasticity when retraining corrupted models on clean dataset, reforming the original model mechanisms.

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2025

Where is this coming from? Making groundedness count in the evaluation of Document VQA models

Similar lecture

Guardians of the Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation: Sentinel Metrics Fall In!