Austria

One of the major outstanding questions in computational semantics is how humans integrate the meaning of individual words into a sentence in a way that enables understanding of complex and novel combinations of words, a phenomenon known as compositionality. Two major approaches to modelling the process of compositionality are vector-based models, in which the meaning of a sentence is represented as a vector of numbers, and syntax-based models, in which the meaning of a sentence is represented as a structured tree of labelled components. A major barrier in assessing and comparing these contrasting approaches is the lack of large, relevant datasets for model comparison. This paper aims to address this gap by introducing a new dataset, STS3k, which consists of 2,800 pairs of sentences rated for semantic similarity by human participants. The sentence pairs have been selected to systematically vary different combinations of words, providing a rigorous test and enabling a clearer picture of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of vector-based and syntax-based methods. Our results show that when tested on the new STS3k dataset, state-of-the-art transformers poorly capture the pattern of human semantic similarity judgments, while even simple methods for combining syntax- and vector-based components into a novel hybrid model yield substantial improvements. We further show that this improvement is due to the ability of the hybrid model to replicate human sensitivity to specific changes in sentence structure. Our findings provide evidence for the value of integrating multiple methods to better reflect the way in which humans mentally represent compositional meaning.

ACL 2025

Compositionality and Sentence Meaning: Comparing Semantic Parsing and Transformers on a Challenging Sentence Similarity Dataset

llms

semantic textual similarity

semantic parsing

natural language processing

compositionality

semantics

# Welcome everyone to ACL 2022!

The 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics is taking place May 22-27, 2022 as a hybrid event, in Dublin and online. We are happy to welcome all of you to this anniversary edition with an almost 50-50 in-person and virtual participation. 
The main conference program features oral presentations, in-person and virtual posters and demo sessions, a plenary session for our best paper presentations and awards, three amazing keynote events and two new initiatives of invited talks: Spotlight Talks for Young Rising Stars (STIRS) and The Next Big Idea Talks. Posters (including Findings of ACL 2022) and demos are grouped by areas for both the in-person and the virtual sessions. For the virtual component, the talks will be on Zoom and the posters and the demos will be in GatherTown. The Student Research Workshop will have an oral session and a poster session as part of Poster Session 1. The program also features eight Tutorials and 28 Workshops. 

 
We wish you a wonderful conference! 
[**The ACL 2022 Organizing Committee**](https://www.2022.aclweb.org/organisers)
 
[**Conference Handbook**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_BUCMfhMVrjG9E2e71aHdHeE28KSje0l/view?usp=sharing) 
[**Mini Handbook**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qlBKl0wzmlVF1oCeMQl3BahLd9nLP5Ce/view?usp=sharing) 
[**Posters and Demo guides**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UucMAoCNncIOaH1rMMDa0owuG9qgvJTG/view?usp=sharing)

ACL 2022

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

poster

### Welcome to The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025)

Message from the General Chair: 
*It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025), held in beautiful Vienna, Austria, from July 27 to August 1, 2025. ACL2025continues our field’s tradition of excellence in scholarship, innovation, and inclusivity, and I am deeply grateful to the many volunteers who have worked tirelessly to bring this event to life.* 
[Read more](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GI_hvOpjswAuYdUTromfeDiPpCcqidwg/view?usp=sharing)

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline - subject line "Welcome to ACL 2025". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. 

Welcome to The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025)

The brain's ability to perform complex computations at varying timescales is crucial, ranging from understanding single words to grasping the overarching narrative of a story. Recently, multi-timescale long short-term memory (MT-LSTM) models (Mahto et al. 2020; Jain et al. 2020) have been introduced to use temporally-tuned parameters to induce sensitivity to different timescales of language processing (i.e. related to near/distant words). However, whether the temporally-tuned information processing in MT-LSTMs is similar to the brain has not been explored using high temporal resolution recording modalities such as electroencephalography (EEG).To bridge this gap, we used an EEG dataset recorded while participants listened to Chapter 1 of "Alice in Wonderland" and trained ridge regression models to predict the temporally-tuned MT-LSTM embeddings from EEG responses. Our analysis reveals that EEG signal segments can effectively predict MT-LSTM embeddings across various timescales. For longer timescales, predictions are significant within an extended time window of Â±2 s around word onset, while for shorter timescales, significant predictions are confined to a narrow window ranging from -180 ms to 790 ms. Intriguingly, we observed that short timescale information is not only processed in the vicinity of word onset but also at distant time points. % , specifically at -1 and +2 s.These observations underscore the parallels and discrepancies between computational models and the neural mechanisms of the brain. As word embeddings are used more as \textit{in silico} models of semantic representation in the brain, the ability to induce word embeddings, tuned to different timescales, allows for an ever-increasing range of questions in language processing in humans and machines to be addressed via brain-model analyses.

Exploring Temporal Sensitivity in the Brain Using Multi-timescale Language Models: An EEG Decoding Study

This study explores the cognitive mechanisms underlying human language acquisition through grammar induction by a minimal cognitive architecture, with a short and flexible sequence memory as its most central feature. We use reinforcement learning for the task of identifying sentences in a stream of words from artificial languages. Results demonstrate the modelâs ability to identify frequent and informative multi-word chunks, reproducing characteristics of natural language acquisition. The model successfully navigates varying degrees of linguistic complexity, exposing efficient adaptation to combinatorial challenges through the reuse of sequential patterns. The emergence of parsimonious tree structures suggests an optimization for the sentence identification task, balancing economy and information. The cognitive architecture reflects aspects of human memory systems and decision-making processes, enhancing its cognitive plausibility. While the model exhibits limitations in generalization and semantic representation, its minimalist nature offers insights into some fundamental mechanisms of language learning. Our study demonstrates the power of this simple architecture and stresses the importance of sequence memory in language learning. Since other animals do not seem to have faithful sequence memory, this may be a key to understanding why only humans have developed complex languages.

Usage-based Grammar Induction from Minimal Cognitive Principles

Humans acquire their native languages by actively taking part in communicative interactions with their caregivers. These interactions are meaningful, intentional and situated in their everyday environment. The situated and communicative nature of the interactions is essential to the language acquisition process, as language learners depend on clues provided by the communicative environment to make sense of the utterances they perceive. As such, the linguistic knowledge they build up is rooted in linguistic forms, their meaning and their communicative function. When it comes to machines, the situated, communicative and interactional aspects of language learning are often passed over. This applies in particular to today's large language models (LLMs), where the input is purely text-based, and where the distribution of character groups or words serves as a basis for modelling the meaning of linguistic expressions. In this paper, we argue that this design choice lies at the root of a number of important limitations, in particular regarding the data hungriness of the models, their limited ability to perform logical and pragmatic reasoning, and their susceptibility to biases. At the same time, we make a case for an alternative approach that models how artificial agents can acquire linguistic structures by participating in situated communicative interactions. Through a selection of experiments, we show how the linguistic knowledge that is captured in the resulting models is of a fundamentally different nature than the knowledge captured by LLMs, and argue that this change of perspective provides a promising path towards more human-like language processing in machines.

Humans Learn Language from Situated Communicative Interactions. What about Machines?

Current open-domain neural semantics parsers show impressive performance. However, closer inspection of the symbolic meaning representations they produce reveals significant weaknesses: sometimes they tend to merely copy character sequences from the source text to form symbolic concepts, defaulting to the most frequent word sense based in the training distribution. By leveraging the hierarchical structure of a lexical ontology, we introduce a novel compositional symbolic representation for concepts based on their position in the taxonomical hierarchy. This representation provides richer semantic information and enhances interpretability. We introduce a neural "taxonomical" semantic parser Â to utilize this new representation system of predicates, and compare it with a standard neural semantic parser trained on the traditional meaning representation format, employing a novel challenge set and evaluation metric for evaluation. Our experimental findings demonstrate that the taxonomical model, trained on much richer and complex meaning representations, is slightly subordinate in performance to the traditional model using the standard metrics for evaluation, but outperforms it when dealing with out-of-vocabulary concepts. We further showed through neural model probing that training on a taxonomic representation enhances the model's ability to learn the taxonomical hierarchy. This finding is encouraging for research in computational semantics that aims to combine data-driven distributional meanings with knowledge-based symbolic representations.

Neural Semantic Parsing with Extremely Rich Symbolic Meaning Representations

Idiomatic expressions are an integral part of human languages, often used to express complex ideas in compressed or conventional ways (e.g., eager beaver as a keen and enthusiastic person). However, their interpretations may not be straightforwardly linked to the meanings of their individual components in isolation and this may have an impact for compositional approaches. In this article, we investigate to what extent word representation models are able to go beyond compositional word combinations and capture multiword expression idiomaticity and some of the expected properties related to idiomatic meanings. We focus on noun compounds of varying levels of idiomaticity in two languages (English and Portuguese), presenting a dataset of minimal pairs containing human idiomaticity judgments for each noun compound at both type and token levels, their paraphrases and their occurrences in naturalistic and sense-neutral contexts, totalling 32,200 sentences. We propose this set of minimal pairs for evaluating how well a model captures idiomatic meanings, and define a set of fine-grained metrics of Affinity and Scaled Similarity, to determine how sensitive the models are to perturbations that may lead to changes in idiomaticity. Affinity is a comparative measure of the similarity between an experimental item, a target and a potential distractor, and Scaled Similarity incorporates a rescaling factor to magnify the meaningful similarities within the spaces defined by each specific model. The results obtained with a variety of representative and widely used models indicate that, despite superficial indications to the contrary in the form of high similarities, idiomaticity is not yet accurately represented in current models. Moreover, the performance of models with different levels of contextualization suggests that their ability to capture context is not yet able to go beyond more superficial lexical clues provided by the words and to actually incorporate the relevant semantic clues needed for idiomaticity. By proposing model-agnostic measures for assessing the ability of models to capture idiomaticity, this article contributes to determining limitations in the handling of non-compositional structures, which is one of the directions that needs to be considered for more natural, accurate, and robust language understanding. The source code and additional materials related to this paper are available at our GitHub repository.

Investigating Idiomaticity in Word Representations

Goal-oriented script planning, or the ability to devise coherent sequences of actions toward specific goals, is commonly employed by humans to plan for typical activities. In e-commerce, customers increasingly seek LLM-based assistants to generate scripts and recommend products at each step, thereby facilitating convenient and efficient shopping experiences. However, this capability remains underexplored due to several challenges, including the inability of LLMs to simultaneously conduct script planning and product retrieval, difficulties in matching products caused by semantic discrepancies between planned actions and search queries, and a lack of methods and benchmark data for evaluation. In this paper, we step forward by formally defining the task of E-commerce Script Planning (EcomScript) as three sequential subtasks. We propose a novel framework that enables the scalable generation of product-enriched scripts by associating products with each step based on the semantic similarity between the actions and their purchase intentions. By applying our framework to real-world e-commerce data, we construct the very first large-scale EcomScript dataset, EcomScriptBench, which includes 605,229 scripts sourced from 2.4 million products. Human annotations are then conducted to provide gold labels for a sampled subset, forming an evaluation benchmark. Extensive experiments reveal that current (L)LMs face significant challenges with EcomScript tasks, even after fine-tuning, while injecting product purchase intentions improves their performance.

EcomScriptBench: A Multi-task Benchmark for E-commerce Script Planning via Step-wise Intention-Driven Product Association

Reward models (RMs) have driven the state-of-the-art performance of LLMs today by enabling the integration of human feedback into the language modeling process. However, RMs are primarily trained and evaluated in English, and their capabilities in multilingual settings remain largely understudied. In this work, we conduct a systematic evaluation of several reward models in multilingual settings. We first construct the first-of-its-kind multilingual RM evaluation benchmark, M-RewardBench, consisting of 2.87k preference instances for 23 typologically diverse languages, that tests the chat, safety, reasoning, and translation capabilities of RMs. We then rigorously evaluate a wide range of reward models on M-RewardBench, offering fresh insights into their performance across diverse languages. We identify a significant gap in RMs' performances between English and non-English languages and show that RM preferences can change substantially from one language to another. We also present several findings on how different multilingual aspects impact RM performance. Specifically, we show that the performance of RMs is improved with improved translation quality. Similarly, we demonstrate that the models exhibit better performance for high-resource languages. We release M-RewardBench dataset and the codebase in this study to facilitate a better understanding of RM evaluation in multilingual settings.

M-RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models in Multilingual Settings

Standard bias benchmarks used for large language models (LLMs) measure the association between social attributes in model inputs and single-word model outputs. We test whether these benchmarks are robust to lengthening the model outputs via a more realistic user prompt, in the commonly studied domain of gender-occupation bias, as a step towards measuring Realistic Use and Tangible Effects (i.e., RUTEd evaluations). From the current literature, we adapt three standard metrics of next-word prediction (neutrality, skew, and stereotype), and we develop analogous RUTEd evaluations in three contexts of real-world LLM use: children's bedtime stories, user personas, and English language learning exercises. We find that standard bias metrics have no significant correlation with long-form output metrics. For example, selecting the least biased model based on the standard “trick tests” coincides with selecting the least biased model based on longer output no more than random chance. There may not yet be evidence to justify standard benchmarks as reliable proxies of real-world biases, and we encourage further development of context-specific RUTEd evaluations.

Bias in Language Models: Beyond Trick Tests and Towards RUTEd Evaluation

The paper focuses on the interpretability of Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) evaluation metrics, which received little attention in previous studies. To bridge the gap, we introduce **CLEME2.0**, a reference-based metric describing four fundamental aspects of GEC systems: hit-correction, wrong-correction, under-correction, and over-correction. They collectively contribute to exposing critical qualities and locating drawbacks of GEC systems. Evaluating systems by combining these aspects also leads to superior human consistency over other reference-based and reference-less metrics. Extensive experiments on two human judgment datasets and six reference datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of our method, achieving a new state-of-the-art result. Our codes are released at https://github.com/THUKElab/CLEME.

CLEME2.0: Towards Interpretable Evaluation by Disentangling Edits for Grammatical Error Correction

AI holds promise for transforming scientific processes, including hypothesis generation. Prior work on hypothesis generation can be broadly categorized into theory-driven and data-driven approaches. While both have proven effective in generating novel and plausible hypotheses, it remains an open question whether they can complement each other. To address this, we develop the first method that combines literature-based insights with data to perform LLM-powered hypothesis generation. We apply our method on five different datasets and demonstrate that integrating literature and data outperforms other baselines (8.97% over few-shot, 15.75% over literature-based alone, and 3.37% over data-driven alone). Additionally, we conduct the first human evaluation to assess the utility of LLM-generated hypotheses in assisting human decision-making on two challenging tasks: deception detection and AI generated content detection. Our results show that human accuracy improves significantly by 7.44% and 14.19% on these tasks, respectively. These findings suggest that integrating literature-based and data-driven approaches provides a comprehensive and nuanced framework for hypothesis generation and could open new avenues for scientific inquiry.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

Exploring Temporal Sensitivity in the Brain Using Multi-timescale Language Models: An EEG Decoding Study

Similar lecture

Sentence Similarity Based on Contexts