United States

This study explores the integration of automated writing evaluation (AWE) and grammatical error correction (GEC) through multitask learning, demonstrating how combining these distinct tasks can enhance performance in both areas. By leveraging a shared learning framework, we show that models trained jointly on AWE and GEC outperform those trained on each task individually. To support this effort, we introduce a dataset specifically designed for multitask learning using AWE and GEC. Our experiments reveal significant synergies between tasks, leading to improvements in both writing assessment accuracy and error correction precision. This research represents a novel approach for optimizing language learning tools by unifying writing evaluation and correction tasks, offering insights into the potential of multitask learning in educational applications.

NAACL 2025

Unified Automated Essay Scoring and Grammatical Error Correction

automated writing evaluation

multitask learning

language learning

grammatical error correction

### 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

Through numerous endeavors, large language models (LLMs) have witnessed significant advancements in their instruction-following capability. However, we discern that LLMs are prone to generate responses to instruction-formatted statements in an instinctive manner, rather than comprehending the underlying user intention reside within the given instructions. We also recognize that the significance of instruction understanding capability is largely overlooked in most of LLM evaluation benchmarks. To ensure more comprehensive evaluation on the instruction understanding capability of LLM, we propose Intention of Instruction (IntInst) benchmark, which primary objective is to distinguish the appropriate instruction that accurately instruct to generate a given context. IntInst presents four instruction candidates and requires LLMs to select one among them. Through extensive experiments with several instruction-tuned LLMs, we reveal that most LLMs struggle to grasp the actual intention concealed in the instruction and thoroughly analyze the factors influencing instruction understanding.

Find the Intention of Instruction: Comprehensive Evaluation of Instruction Understanding for Large Language Models

Reasoning abilities of LLMs have been a key focus in recent years. One challenging reasoning domain with interesting nuances is legal reasoning, which requires careful application of rules, and precedents while balancing deductive and analogical reasoning, and conflicts between rules. Although there have been a few works on using LLMs for legal reasoning, their focus has been on overall accuracy. In this paper, we dig deeper to do a step-by-step analysis and figure out where they commit errors. We use the college-level Multiple Choice Question-Answering (MCQA) task from the *Civil Procedure* dataset and propose a new error taxonomy derived from initial manual analysis of reasoning chains with respect to several LLMs, including two objective measures: soundness and correctness scores. We then develop an LLM-based automated evaluation framework to identify reasoning errors and evaluate the performance of LLMs. The computation of soundness and correctness on the dataset using the auto-evaluator framework reveals several interesting insights. Furthermore, we show that incorporating the error taxonomy as feedback in popular prompting techniques marginally increases LLM performance. Our work will also serve as an evaluation framework that can be used in detailed error analysis of reasoning chains for logic-intensive complex tasks.

Investigating the Shortcomings of LLMs in Step-by-Step Legal Reasoning

Countless decisions shape our lives, and it is crucial to understand the how and why behind them. In this paper, we introduce a new LLM decision-making framework called STRUX, which enhances LLM decision-making by providing structured explanations. These include favorable and adverse facts related to the decision, along with their respective strengths. STRUX begins by distilling lengthy information into a concise table of key facts. It then employs a series of self-reflection steps to determine which of these facts are pivotal, categorizing them as either favorable or adverse in relation to a specific decision. Lastly, we fine-tune an LLM to identify and prioritize these key facts to optimize decision-making. STRUX has been evaluated on the challenging task of forecasting stock investment decisions based on earnings call transcripts and demonstrated superior performance against strong baselines. It enhances decision transparency by allowing users to understand the impact of different factors, representing a meaningful step towards practical decision-making with LLMs.

STRUX: An LLM for Decision-Making with Structured Explanations

Automated vulnerability repair is a crucial field within software engineering and security research. Large Language Models (LLMs) and LLM agents have demonstrated significant potential in this domain by understanding descriptions in natural language and generating corresponding formal code. Although the coding capabilities of LLMs have advanced rapidly, evaluation benchmarks for real-world programming setups are still lagging, preventing the development of LLM and LLM agents in real-world vulnerability repair. To this end, we introduce CVE-Bench, an evaluation framework consisting of 509 Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) from four programming languages and 120 popular open-source repositories. Unlike previous vulnerability repair benchmarks, which only involve the code input and output, we provide LLM agents with a test environment that simulates the real-world vulnerability repair process. This environment provides multiple levels of CVE information modeling, such as black-box testing and white-box testing. It enables the agents to use static analysis tools to assist their repair process. Our evaluation reveals that the SWE-agent can only repair 21% of vulnerabilities at its best. Furthermore, they lack expert knowledge about how to use the analysis tool to assist in vulnerability repair.

CVE-Bench: Benchmarking LLM-based Software Engineering Agent’s Ability to Repair Real-World CVE Vulnerabilities

Evaluating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems remains challenging, particularly for open-ended questions that lack definitive answers and require coverage of multiple sub-topics. In this paper, we introduce a novel evaluation framework based on sub-question coverage, which measures how well a RAG system addresses different facets of a question. We propose decomposing questions into sub-questions and classifying them into three types—core, background, and follow-up—to reflect their roles and importance. Using this categorization, we introduce a fine-grained evaluation protocol that provides insights into the retrieval and generation characteristics of RAG systems, including three commercial generative answer engines: You.com, Perplexity AI, and Bing Chat. Interestingly, we find that while all answer engines cover core sub-questions more often than background or follow-up ones, they still miss around 50% of core sub-questions, revealing clear opportunities for improvement. Further, sub-question coverage metrics prove effective for ranking responses, achieving 82% accuracy compared to human preference annotations. Lastly, we also demonstrate that leveraging core sub-questions enhances both retrieval and answer generation in a RAG system, resulting in a 74% win rate over the baseline that lacks sub-questions.

Do RAG Systems Cover What Matters? Evaluating and Optimizing Responses with Sub-Question Coverage

The emergence of Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has alleviated the issues of outdated and hallucinatory content in the generation of large language models (LLMs), yet it still reveals numerous limitations. When a general-purpose LLM serves as the RAG generator, it often suffers from inadequate response informativeness, response robustness, and citation quality. Past approaches to tackle these limitations, either by incorporating additional steps beyond generating responses or optimizing the generator through supervised fine-tuning (SFT), still failed to align with the RAG requirement thoroughly. Consequently, optimizing the RAG generator from multiple preference perspectives while maintaining its end-to-end LLM form remains a challenge. To bridge this gap, we propose Multiple Perspective Preference Alignment for Retrieval-Augmented Generation (PA-RAG), a method for optimizing the generator of RAG systems to align with RAG requirements comprehensively. Specifically, we construct high-quality instruction fine-tuning data and multi-perspective preference data by sampling varied quality responses from the generator across different prompt documents quality scenarios. Subsequently, we optimize the generator using SFT and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Extensive experiments conducted on four question-answer datasets across three LLMs demonstrate that PA-RAG can significantly enhance the performance of RAG generators. Our code and datasets are available at https://github.com/wujwyi/PA-RAG.

PA-RAG: RAG Alignment via Multi-Perspective Preference Optimization

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance improvements and are rapidly gaining adoption in industry. However, the methods for improving LLMs are still designed by humans, which restricts the invention of new model-improving algorithms to human expertise and imagination. To address this, we propose the *Self-Developing* framework, which enables LLMs to autonomously generate and learn model-improvement algorithms. In this framework, the seed model generates, applies, and learns model-improving algorithms, continuously improving both the seed model and the algorithms themselves. Among model-improving strategies, we focus on model merging algorithms. In mathematical reasoning tasks, Self-Developing discovers novel merging strategies and outperforms human-designed methods. On GSM8k, the discovered algorithms improve the seed model by 6% and surpass human-designed methods by 4.3%. Moreover, they exhibit strong transferability, achieving a 7.4% performance gain on out-of-domain models. These results suggest that LLMs can autonomously develop effective model-improvement techniques beyond human intuition.

Can Large Language Models Invent Algorithms to Improve Themselves?

Knowledge conflict arises from discrepancies between information in the context of a large language model (LLM) and the knowledge stored in its parameters. This can hurt performance when using standard decoding techniques, which tend to ignore the context. Existing test-time contrastive methods seek to address this by comparing the LLM's output distribution with and without the context and adjust the model according to the contrast between them. However, we find that these methods frequently misjudge the degree of conflict and struggle to handle instances that vary in their amount of conflict, with static methods over-adjusting when conflict is absent. We propose a fine-grained, instance-level approach called AdaCAD, which dynamically infers the weight of adjustment based on the degree of conflict, as measured by the Jensen-Shannon divergence between distributions representing contextual and parametric knowledge. Across four LLMs, six question-answering (QA) and three summarization datasets, we demonstrate that AdaCAD consistently outperforms other decoding baselines with average QA accuracy gains of 14.21% (absolute) over a static contrastive baseline, and improves the factuality of summaries by 6.19 (AlignScore). Lastly, we show that while contrastive baselines hurt performance when conflict is absent, AdaCAD mitigates these losses, making it more applicable to real-world datasets in which some examples have conflict and others do not.

AdaCAD: Adaptively Decoding to Balance Conflicts between Contextual and Parametric Knowledge

Large language models (LLMs) still lack delicate controllability over their responses, which is critical to enhancing their performance and the user experience. However, curating supervised fine-tuning (SFT) datasets to improve LLM controllability usually relies on human experts or proprietary LLMs, which requires additional costs. To bridge this gap, we propose Rule-based Data Recycling (RuleR), a data augmentation method incorporating multiple constraints into the original data samples according to predefined rules, which creates new training tasks to consolidate the controllability of LLMs. Instead of creating new data from scratch, RuleR ``recycles'' existing data by simply applying rule-based edits to their responses and appending the rule-instructions in their original instructions. Experimental results demonstrate RuleR's effectiveness in improving LLM controllability while maintaining general instruction-following capabilities.

RuleR: Improving LLM Controllability by Rule-based Data Recycling

The integration of documents generated by LLMs themselves (Self-Docs) alongside retrieved documents has emerged as a promising strategy for retrieval-augmented generation systems. However, previous research primarily focuses on optimizing the use of Self-Docs, with their inherent properties remaining underexplored. To bridge this gap, we first investigate the overall effectiveness of Self-Docs, identifying key factors that shape their contribution to RAG performance (RQ1). Building on these insights, we develop a taxonomy grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics to compare the influence of various Self-Docs categories (RQ2) and explore strategies for combining them with external sources (RQ3). Our findings reveal which types of Self-Docs are most beneficial and offer practical guidelines for leveraging them to achieve significant improvements in knowledge-intensive question answering tasks.

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2025

Find the Intention of Instruction: Comprehensive Evaluation of Instruction Understanding for Large Language Models

Similar lecture

Detection-Correction Structure via General Language Model for Grammatical Error Correction