Austria

Canceling is a morally-driven phenomenon that hinders the development of safe social media platforms and contributes to ideological polarization. To address this issue we present the Canceling Attitudes Detection (CADE) dataset, an annotated corpus of canceling incidents aimed at exploring the factors of disagreements in evaluating people&#39;s canceling attitudes on social media. Specifically, we study the impact of annotators&#39; morality in their perception of canceling, showing that morality is an independent axis for the explanation of disagreement on this phenomenon. Annotator&#39;s judgments heavily depend on the type of controversial events and involved celebrities. This shows the need to develop more event-centric datasets to better understand how harms are perpetrated in social media and to develop more aware technologies for their detection.

ACL 2025

That is Unacceptable: the Moral Foundations of Canceling

moral foundations theory

acceptability

stance

cancel culture

Join us for CogSci2022! Our 44th Annual Conference will be centered around the theme of diversity, with an accompanying range of keynotes and invited speakers who themselves highlight the diversity of our field. Our three symposia are Cognition across Diverse Populations, Cognition within Diverse Societies, and Global Challenges for Cognitive Science. The conference is being offered in a fully hybrid environment for onsite and online attendees.
 
 [**The Program at a Glance can be found here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Cogsci-2022-PAAG-Detailed-July-12final-1.pdf)
 [**The Detailed Program can be found here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/DeArmond-CogSci2022-program-v113-final.pdf)

This conference requires a registration to attend. Please use the link below to secure your ticket. The website will be available to all registered attendees on July 25th. 

[Register to Attend](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/registration/)

Registration Is Required

CogSci 2022

The 44th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society highlighted research on the theme Cognitive Diversity in addition to the full breadth and diversity of research topics offered by the society’s membership. 





Canceling is a morally-driven phenomenon that hinders the development of safe social media platforms and contributes to ideological polarization. To address this issue we present the Canceling Attitudes Detection (CADE) dataset, an annotated corpus of canceling incidents aimed at exploring the factors of disagreements in evaluating people's canceling attitudes on social media. Specifically, we study the impact of annotators' morality in their perception of canceling, showing that morality is an independent axis for the explanation of disagreement on this phenomenon. Annotator's judgments heavily depend on the type of controversial events and involved celebrities. This shows the need to develop more event-centric datasets to better understand how harms are perpetrated in social media and to develop more aware technologies for their detection.

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)

Evaluating text revision in scientific writing remains a challenge, as traditional metrics such as ROUGE and BERTScore primarily focus on similarity rather than capturing meaningful improvements. In this work, we analyse and identify the limitations of these metrics and explore alternative evaluation methods that better align with human judgments. We first conduct a manual annotation study to assess the quality of different revisions. Then, we investigate reference-free evaluation metrics from related NLP domains. Additionally, we examine LLM-as-a-judge approaches, analysing their ability to assess revisions with and without a gold reference. Our results show that LLMs effectively assess instruction-following but struggle with correctness, while domain-specific metrics provide complementary insights. We find that a hybrid approach combining LLM-as-a-judge evaluation and task-specific metrics offers the most reliable assessment of revision.

Identifying Reliable Evaluation Metrics for Scientific Text Revision

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to complex reasoning tasks, achieving both accurate task performance and faithful explanations becomes crucial. However, LLMs often generate unfaithful explanations, partly because they do not consistently adhere closely to the provided context. Existing approaches to this problem either rely on superficial calibration methods, such as decomposed Chain-of-Thought prompting, or require costly retraining to improve model faithfulness. In this work, we propose a probabilistic inference paradigm that leverages task-specific and lookahead rewards to ensure that LLM-generated rationales are more faithful to model decisions and align better with input context. These rewards are derived from a domain-specific proposal distribution, allowing for optimized sequential Monte Carlo approximations. Our evaluations across three different reasoning tasks show that this method, which allows for controllable generation during inference, improves both accuracy and faithfulness of LLMs. This method offers a promising path towards making LLMs more reliable for reasoning tasks without sacrificing performance.

Drift: Enhancing LLM Faithfulness in Rationale Generation via Dual-Reward Probabilistic Inference

A common strategy for fact-checking long-form content generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) is extracting simple claims that can be verified independently. Since inaccurate or incomplete claims compromise fact-checking results, ensuring claim quality is critical. However, the lack of a standardized evaluation framework impedes assessment and comparison of claim extraction methods. To address this gap, we propose a framework for evaluating claim extraction in the context of fact-checking along with automated, scalable, and replicable methods for applying this framework, including novel approaches for measuring coverage and decontextualization. We also introduce Claimify, an LLM-based claim extraction method, and demonstrate that it outperforms existing methods under our evaluation framework. A key feature of Claimify is its ability to handle ambiguity and extract claims only when there is high confidence in the correct interpretation of the source text.

Towards Effective Extraction and Evaluation of Factual Claims

Learning from human feedback has enabled the alignment of language models (LMs) with human preferences. However, collecting human preferences is expensive and time-consuming, with highly variable annotation quality. An appealing alternative is to distill preferences from LMs as a source of synthetic annotations, offering a cost-effective and scalable alternative, albeit susceptible to other biases and errors. In this work, we introduce HyPER, a Hybrid Preference routER that defers an annotation to either humans or LMs, achieving better annotation quality while reducing the cost of human-only annotation. We formulate this as an optimization problem: given a preference dataset and an evaluation metric, we (1) train a performance prediction model (PPM) to predict a reward model's (RM) performance on an arbitrary combination of human and LM annotations and (2) employ a routing strategy that selects a combination that maximizes predicted performance. We train the PPM on MultiPref, a new preference dataset with 10K instances paired with human and LM labels. We show that the selected hybrid mixture of synthetic and direct human preferences using HyPER achieves better RM performance compared to using either one exclusively by 7-13% on RewardBench and generalizes across unseen preference datasets and other base models. We also observe the same trend in other benchmarks using Best-of-N reranking, where the hybrid mix has 2-3% better performance. Finally, we analyze features from HyPER and find that prompts with moderate safety concerns or complexity benefit the most from human feedback.

Hybrid Preferences: Learning to Route Instances for Human vs. AI Feedback

Automatic evaluation for Open Domain Event Detection (ODED) is a highly challenging task, because ODED is characterized by a vast diversity of un-constrained output labels from various domains. Nearly all existing evaluation methods for ODED usually first construct evaluation benchmarks with limited labels and domain coverage, and then evaluate ODED methods using metrics based on token-level label matching rules. However, this kind of evaluation framework faces two issues: (1) The limited evaluation benchmarks lack representatives of the real world, making it difficult to accurately reflect the performance of various ODED methods in real-world scenarios; (2) Evaluation metrics based on token-level matching rules fail to capture semantic similarity between predictions and golden labels. To address these two problems above, we propose a scalable and reliable Semantic-level Evaluation framework for Open domain Event detection (SEOE) by constructing a more representative evaluation benchmark and introducing a semantic evaluation metric. Specifically, our proposed framework first constructs a scalable evaluation benchmark that currently includes 564 event types covering 7 major domains, with a cost-effective supplementary annotation strategy to ensure the benchmark's representativeness. The strategy also allows for the supplement of new event types and domains in the future. Then, the proposed SEOE leverages large language models (LLMs) as automatic evaluation agents to compute a semantic F1-score, incorporating fine-grained definitions of semantically similar labels to enhance the reliability of the evaluation. Extensive experiments validate the representatives of the benchmark and the reliability of the semantic evaluation metric. Existing ODED methods are thoroughly evaluated, and the error patterns of predictions are analyzed, revealing several insightful findings.

SEOE: A Scalable and Reliable Semantic Evaluation Framework for Open Domain Event Detection

This paper presents UD-NewsCrawl, the largest Tagalog treebank to date, containing 15.6k trees manually annotated according to
the Universal Dependencies framework. We detail our treebank development process, including data collection, pre-processing, manual annotation, and quality assurance procedures. We provide baseline evaluations using multiple transformer-based models to assess the performance of state-of-the-art dependency parsers on Tagalog. We also highlight challenges in the syntactic analysis of Tagalog given its distinctive grammatical properties, and discuss its implications for the annotation of this treebank. We anticipate that UD-NewsCrawl and our baseline model implementations will serve as valuable resources for advancing computational linguistics research in underrepresented languages like Tagalog.

The UD-NewsCrawl Treebank: Reflections and Challenges from a Large-scale Tagalog Syntactic Annotation Project

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive progress in mathematical reasoning. While data augmentation is promising to enhance mathematical problem-solving ability, current approaches are predominantly limited to instance-level modifications—such as rephrasing or generating syntactic variations—which fail to capture and leverage the intrinsic relational structures inherent in mathematical knowledge. Inspired by human learning processes, where mathematical proficiency develops through systematic exposure to interconnected concepts, we introduce \textbf{\mbox{MathFusion}}, a novel framework that enhances mathematical reasoning through cross-problem instruction synthesis. MathFusion implements this through three fusion strategies: (1) \textit{sequential fusion}, which chains related problems to model solution dependencies; (2) \textit{parallel fusion}, which combines analogous problems to reinforce conceptual understanding; and (3) \textit{conditional fusion}, which creates context-aware selective problems to enhance reasoning flexibility. By applying these strategies, we generate a new dataset, \textbf{MathFusionQA}, followed by fine-tuning models (DeepSeekMath-7B, Mistral-7B, Llama3-8B) on it. Experimental results demonstrate that MathFusion achieves substantial improvements in mathematical reasoning while maintaining high data efficiency, boosting performance by 18.0 points in accuracy across diverse benchmarks while requiring only 45K additional synthetic instructions, representing a substantial improvement over traditional single-instruction approaches.

MathFusion: Enhancing Mathematical Problem-solving of LLM through Instruction Fusion

While ChatGPT and GPT-based models are able to effectively perform many tasks without additional fine-tuning, they struggle with tasks related to extremely low-resource languages and indigenous languages. Uniform Meaning Representation (UMR), a semantic representation designed to capture the meaning of texts in many languages, is well-positioned to be leveraged in the development of low-resource language technologies. In this work, we explore the downstream utility of UMR for low-resource languages by incorporating it into GPT-4 prompts. Specifically, we examine the ability of GPT-4 to perform translation from three indigenous languages (Navajo, Arápaho, and Kukama), with and without demonstrations, as well as with and without UMR annotations. Ultimately, we find that in the majority of our test cases, integrating UMR into the prompt results in a statistically significant increase in performance, which is a promising indication of future applications of the UMR formalism.

Can Uniform Meaning Representation Help GPT-4 Translate from Indigenous Languages?

A common use of NLP is to facilitate the understanding of large document collections, with models based on Large Language Models (LLMs) replacing probabilistic topic models. Yet the effectiveness of LLM-based approaches in real-world applications remains under explored. This study measures the knowledge users acquire with topic models—including traditional, unsupervised and supervised LLM- based approaches—on two datasets. While LLM-based methods generate more human- readable topics and show higher average win probabilities than traditional models for data exploration, they produce overly generic topics for domain-specific datasets that do not easily allow users to learn much about the documents. Adding human supervision to LLM-based topic models improves data exploration by addressing hallucination and genericity but requires more human efforts. In contrast, traditional models like Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) remain effective for exploration but are less user-friendly. This paper provides best practices—there is no one right model, the choice of models is situation-specific—and suggests potential improvements for scalable LLM- based topic models.

LLMs Struggle to Describe the Haystack without Human Help: A Social Science-Inspired Evaluation of Topic Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications that demand complex reasoning. To track progress, robust benchmarks are required to evaluate their capabilities beyond superficial pattern recognition. However, current LLM reasoning benchmarks often face challenges such as insufficient interpretability, performance saturation or data contamination. To address these challenges, we introduce GAMEBoT, a gaming arena designed for rigorous and transparent assessment of LLM reasoning capabilities. GAMEBoT decompose complex reasoning in games into predefined modular subproblems. This decomposition allows us to design a suite of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompts infused with domain knowledge to guide LLMs in addressing these subproblems before action selection. Furthermore, we develop a suite of rule-based algorithms to generate ground truth for these subproblems, enabling rigorous validation of the LLMs’ intermediate reasoning steps. This approach facilitates evaluation of both the quality of final actions and the accuracy of the underlying reasoning process. GAMEBoT also naturally alleviates the risk of data contamination through dynamic games and head-to-head LLM competitions. We benchmark 17 prominent LLMs across eight games, encompassing various strategic abilities and game characteristics. Our results suggest that GAMEBoT presents a significant challenge, even when LLMs are provided with detailed CoT prompts.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

Identifying Reliable Evaluation Metrics for Scientific Text Revision

Similar lecture

The emergence of moral foundations in child language development