Austria

A large part of human communication relies on nonverbal cues such as facial expressions, eye contact, and body language. 
Unlike language or sign language, such nonverbal communication lacks formal rules, requiring complex reasoning based on commonsense understanding.
Enabling current Video Large Language Models (VideoLLMs) to accurately interpret body language is a crucial challenge, as human unconscious actions can easily cause the model to misinterpret their intent.
To address this, we propose a dataset, BQA, a body language question answering dataset, to validate whether the model can correctly interpret emotions from short clips of body language comprising 26 emotion labels of videos of body language.
We evaluated various VideoLLMs on the BQA with and without Multimodal Chain of Thought (CoT) and revealed that understanding body language is challenging, and our analyses of the wrong answers by VideoLLMs show that certain VideoLLMs made largely biased answers depending on the age group and ethnicity of the individuals. 
We also found consistent error patterns in VideoLLMs.

ACL 2025

BQA: Body Language Question Answering Dataset for Video Large Language Models

video large language models

resource and evaluation

body language understanding

We are pleased to announce the Fortieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-26), which will be held in Singapore EXPO from January 20 to January 27, 2026.

The purpose of the AAAI conference series is to promote research in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and foster scientific exchange between researchers, practitioners, scientists, students, and engineers across the entirety of AI and its affiliated disciplines. AAAI-26 will feature technical paper presentations, special tracks, invited speakers, workshops, tutorials, poster sessions, senior member presentations, competitions, and exhibit programs, and a range of other activities to be announced.

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 AAAI 2026". 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 are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://aaai.org/conference/aaai/aaai-26/registration/) first.

**Online Registration Form**: https://aaai.getregistered.net/conference-2026 

Registration Required

AAAI 2026

We are pleased to announce the Fortieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-26), which will be held in Singapore EXPO from January 20 to January 27, 2026.

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.

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)

As the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) continue to expand, aligning these models with human values remains a significant challenge. Recent studies show that reasoning abilities contribute significantly to model safety, while integrating Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures can further enhance alignment.
In this work, we address a fundamental question:
\textit{How to effectively incorporate reasoning abilities
and MoE architectures into self-alignment process
in LLMs?}
We propose Mixture of insighTful Experts (MoTE), a novel framework that synergistically combines reasoning chains and expert mixtures to improve self-alignments.
From a data perspective, MoTE employs a structured reasoning chain comprising four key stages: Question Analysis, Answer Guidance, Safe Answer, and Safety Checking. This approach enhances safety through multi-step reasoning and proves effective even for smaller and less powerful LLMs (e.g., 7B models). From an architectural perspective, MoTE adopts a multi-LoRA framework with step-level routing, where each expert is dedicated to a specific reasoning step. This design eliminates the need for balance losses, ensures stable training, and supports adaptive inference lengths. Experimental results demonstrate that MoTE significantly improves model safety, jailbreak resistance, and over-refusal capabilities, achieving performance comparable to OpenAI's state-of-the-art o1 model.

Mixture of insighTful Experts (MoTE): The Synergy of Reasoning Chains and Expert Mixtures in Self-Alignment

Questions help unlock information to satisfy users' information needs. However, when the question is poorly posed, answerers (whether human or computer) may struggle to answer the question in a way that satisfies the asker, despite possibly knowing everything necessary to address the asker's latent information need. Using Reddit question-answer interactions from r/NoStupidQuestions, we develop a computational framework grounded in linguistic theory to study poorly-posedness of questions by generating spaces of potential interpretations of questions and computing distributions over these spaces based on interpretations chosen by both human answerers in the Reddit question thread, as well as by a suite of large language models. Both humans and models struggle to converge on dominant interpretations when faced with poorly-posed questions, but employ different strategies: humans focus on specific interpretations through question negotiation, while models attempt comprehensive coverage by addressing many interpretations simultaneously.

No Questions are Stupid, but some are Poorly Posed: Understanding Poorly-Posed Information-Seeking Questions

Evaluating Video Language Models (VLMs) is a challenging task. Due to its transparency, Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) is widely used to measure the performance of these models through accuracy. However, existing MCQA benchmarks fail to capture the full reasoning capabilities of VLMs due to selection bias, when models disproportionately favor certain answer options based on positional patterns observed during training. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive empirical analysis of several VLM architectures across major datasets designed to assess complex video-focused reasoning. We identify where the bias is most pronounced and demonstrate to what extent model responses reflect genuine understanding of video content and related questions, as opposed to reliance on arbitrary patterns or superficial cues, such as answer position. By decomposing the MCQA task and adapting fairness bias metrics to VLMs, we introduce a post-processing calibration technique BOLD to balance this bias. Our results show that reducing selection bias improves not only debiasing metrics but also overall model performance, including Accuracy and F1 Mean score. Our method, by suppressing "blind guessing", offers a more cost- and time-effective approach to mitigating selection bias compared to existing techniques. This study represents the first focused investigation of selection bias in video-to-text LLM-powered models.

Addressing Blind Guessing: Calibration of Selection Bias in Multiple-Choice Question Answering by Video Language Models

Rewards serve as proxies for human preferences and play a crucial role in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). However, if these rewards are inherently imperfect, exhibiting various biases, they can adversely affect the alignment of large language models (LLMs). In this paper, we collectively define the various biases present in rewards as the problem of reward unfairness. We propose a bias-agnostic method to address the issue of reward fairness from a resource allocation perspective, without specifically designing for each type of bias, yet effectively mitigating them. Specifically, we model preference learning as a resource allocation problem, treating rewards as resources to be allocated while considering the trade-off between utility and fairness in their distribution. We propose two methods, Fairness Regularization and Fairness Coefficient, to achieve fairness in rewards. We apply our methods in both verification and reinforcement learning scenarios to obtain a fairness reward model and a policy model, respectively. Experiments conducted in these scenarios demonstrate that our approach aligns LLMs with human preferences in a more fair manner. Our data and code are available at
\url{https://github.com/shoyua/Towards-Reward-Fairness}.

Towards Reward Fairness in RLHF: From a Resource Allocation Perspective

As the impact of large language models increases, understanding the moral values they encode becomes ever more important. Assessing moral values encoded in these models via direct prompting is challenging due to potential leakage of human norms into model training data, and their sensitivity to prompt formulation. Instead, we propose to use word associations, which have been shown to reflect moral reasoning in humans, as low-level underlying representations to obtain a more robust picture of LLMs' moral reasoning. We study moral differences in associations from western English-speaking communities and LLMs trained predominantly on English data. First, we create a large dataset of $\textit{LLM-generated}$ word associations, resembling an existing data set of $\textit{human}$ word associations. Next, we propose a novel method to propagate moral values based on seed words derived from Moral Foundation Theory through the human and LLM-generated association graphs. Finally, we compare the resulting moral representations, highlighting detailed but systematic differences between moral values emerging from English speakers and LLM associations.

Comparing Moral Values in Western English-speaking societies and LLMs with Word Associations

Requiring a large language model (LLM) to generate intermediary reasoning steps, known as Chain of Thought (CoT), has been shown to be an effective way of boosting performance. Previous approaches have focused on generating multiple independent CoTs, combining them through ensembling or other post-hoc strategies to enhance reasoning. In this work, we introduce a novel approach where LLMs are fine-tuned to generate a sequence of Diverse Chains of Thought (DCoT) within a single inference step, which is fundamentally different from prior work that primarily operate on parallel CoT generations. DCoT allows LLMs to gain the ability to perform within-inference refinement of reasoning chains without requiring external feedback. Through a rigorous set of experiments spanning a wide range of tasks that require various reasoning types, we show that fine-tuning on DCoT improves performance over the CoT baseline across model families and scales (1.3B to 70B). These improvements are particularly impactful for tasks with a large result state space, such as those involving numeric answers. Our work is also significant because both quantitative analyses and manual evaluations reveal the observed gains stem from the models' ability to refine an initial reasoning chain by generating a second, improved chain within the same inference step, demonstrating previously elusive self-improvement. Our code and data are publicly available.

Fine-Tuning on Diverse Reasoning Chains Drives Within-Inference CoT Refinement in LLMs

The conformity effect describes the tendency of individuals to align their responses with the majority. Studying this bias in large language models (LLMs) is crucial, as LLMs are increasingly used in various information-seeking and decision-making tasks as conversation partners to improve productivity. Thus, conformity to incorrect responses can compromise their effectiveness. In this paper, we adapt psychological experiments to examine the extent of conformity in state-of-the-art LLMs. Our findings reveal that all models tested exhibit varying levels of conformity toward the majority, regardless of their initial choice or correctness, across different knowledge domains. Notably, we are the first to show that LLMs are more likely to conform when they are more uncertain in their own prediction. We further explore factors that influence conformity, such as training paradigms and input characteristics, finding that instruction-tuned models are less susceptible to conformity, while increasing the naturalness of majority tones amplifies conformity. Finally, we propose two interventions—Devil's Advocate and Question Distillation—to mitigate conformity, providing insights into building more robust language models.

Conformity in Large Language Models

Interpreting the law is always essential for the law to adapt to the ever-changing society. It is a critical and challenging task even for legal practitioners, as it requires meticulous and professional annotations and summarizations by legal experts, which are admittedly time-consuming and expensive to collect at scale. To alleviate the burden on legal experts, we propose a method for automated legal interpretation. Specifically, by emulating doctrinal legal research, we introduce a novel framework, **ATRIE**, to address Legal Concept Interpretation, a typical task in legal interpretation. **ATRIE** utilizes large language models (LLMs) to **A**u**T**omatically **R**etrieve concept-related information, **I**nterpret legal concepts, and **E**valuate generated interpretations, eliminating dependence on legal experts. ATRIE comprises a legal concept interpreter and a legal concept interpretation evaluator. The interpreter uses LLMs to retrieve relevant information from previous cases and interpret legal concepts. The evaluator uses performance changes on Legal Concept Entailment, a downstream task we propose, as a proxy of interpretation quality. Automated and multifaceted human evaluations indicate that the quality of our interpretations is comparable to those written by legal experts, with superior comprehensiveness and readability. Although there remains a slight gap in accuracy, it can already assist legal practitioners in improving the efficiency of legal interpretation.

Automating Legal Concept Interpretation with LLMs: Retrieval, Generation, and Evaluation

Designing solutions for complex engineering challenges is crucial in human production activities. However, previous research in the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) field has not sufficiently addressed tasks related to the design of complex engineering solutions. To fill this gap, we introduce a new benchmark, SolutionBench, to evaluate a system’s ability to generate complete and feasible solutions for engineering problems with multiple complex constraints. To further advance the design of complex engineering solutions, we propose a novel system, SolutionRAG, that leverages the tree-based exploration and bi-point thinking mechanism to generate reliable solutions. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that SolutionRAG achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on the SolutionBench, highlighting its potential to enhance the automation and reliability of complex engineering solution design in real-world applications.

DeepSolution: Boosting Complex Engineering Solution Design via Tree-based Exploration and Bi-point Thinking

The mechanisms behind multilingual capabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs) have been examined using neuron-based or internal-activation-based methods. However, these methods often face challenges such as superposition and layer-wise activation variance, which limit their reliability. Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) offer a more nuanced analysis by decomposing the activations of LLMs into a sparse linear combination of SAE features. We introduce a novel metric to assess the monolinguality of features obtained from SAEs, discovering that some features are strongly related to specific languages. Additionally, we show that ablating these SAE features only significantly reduces abilities in one language of LLMs, leaving others almost unaffected. Interestingly, we find some languages have multiple synergistic SAE features, and ablating them together yields greater improvement than ablating individually. Moreover, we leverage these SAE-derived language-specific features to enhance steering vectors, achieving control over the language generated by LLMs. The code is publicly available at~\url{https://github.com/Aatrox103/multilingual-llm-features}.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

Mixture of insighTful Experts (MoTE): The Synergy of Reasoning Chains and Expert Mixtures in Self-Alignment

Similar lecture

Benchmarking Trustworthiness in Multimodal LLMs for Video Understanding