Austria

Large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive historical corpora, but their ability to understand time and maintain temporal awareness of time-evolving factual knowledge remains limited. Previous studies often neglect the critical aspect of utilizing knowledge from various sources. To address this gap, we introduce EvolveBench, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates temporal competence along five key dimensions: Cognition, which examines the ability to recall and contextualize historical facts. Awareness, which tests LLMs&#39; awareness of temporal misalignment between external inputs and the temporal context of a query. Trustworthiness, which assesses whether models can identify and appropriately refuse queries based on invalid timestamps. Understanding, which focuses on interpreting both explicit dates and implicit historical markers. Finally, reasoning evaluates the capacity to analyze temporal relationships and draw accurate inferences. Evaluating 15 widely used LLMs on EvolveBench shows that GPT-4o achieves the highest average EM score of 79.36, while the open-source Llama3.1-70B demonstrates notable strength in handling temporally misaligned contexts with an average score of 72.47. Despite these advances, all models still struggle with handling temporal misaligned context. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/zzysjtuiwct/EvolveBench.

ACL 2025

EvolveBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Temporal Awareness in LLMs on Evolving Knowledge

evaluation methodologies

language resources

benchmarking

### 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)

Large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive historical corpora, but their ability to understand time and maintain temporal awareness of time-evolving factual knowledge remains limited. Previous studies often neglect the critical aspect of utilizing knowledge from various sources. To address this gap, we introduce EvolveBench, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates temporal competence along five key dimensions: Cognition, which examines the ability to recall and contextualize historical facts. Awareness, which tests LLMs' awareness of temporal misalignment between external inputs and the temporal context of a query. Trustworthiness, which assesses whether models can identify and appropriately refuse queries based on invalid timestamps. Understanding, which focuses on interpreting both explicit dates and implicit historical markers. Finally, reasoning evaluates the capacity to analyze temporal relationships and draw accurate inferences. Evaluating 15 widely used LLMs on EvolveBench shows that GPT-4o achieves the highest average EM score of 79.36, while the open-source Llama3.1-70B demonstrates notable strength in handling temporally misaligned contexts with an average score of 72.47. Despite these advances, all models still struggle with handling temporal misaligned context. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/zzysjtuiwct/EvolveBench.

poster

In this work, we conduct systematic research in a challenging area: the automatic evaluation of book-length stories (>100K tokens). Our study focuses on two key questions: (1) understanding which evaluation aspects matter most to readers, and (2) exploring effective methods for evaluating lengthy stories. We introduce the first large-scale benchmark, **LongStoryEval**, comprising 600 newly published books with an average length of 121K tokens (maximum 397K). Each book includes its average rating and multiple reader reviews, presented as critiques organized by evaluation aspects. By analyzing all user-mentioned aspects, we propose an *evaluation criteria structure* and conduct experiments to identify the most significant aspects among the 8 top-level criteria. For evaluation methods, we compare the effectiveness of three types: *aggregation-based*, *incremental-updated*, and *summary-based* evaluations. Our findings reveal that aggregation- and summary-based evaluations perform better, with the former excelling in detail assessment and the latter offering greater efficiency. Building on these insights, we further propose **NovelCritique**, an 8B model that leverages the efficient summary-based framework to review and score stories across specified aspects. NovelCritique outperforms commercial models like GPT-4o in aligning with human evaluations. All our datasets and codes will be released to foster further research.

What Matters in Evaluating Book-Length Stories? A Systematic Study of Long Story Evaluation

In recent years, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have made significant progress but continue to face inherent challenges in multimodal reasoning, which requires multi-level (e.g., perception, reasoning) and multi-granular (e.g., multi-step reasoning chain) advanced inferencing. Prior work on estimating model confidence tends to focus on the overall response for training and calibration, but fails to assess confidence in each reasoning step, leading to undesirable hallucination snowballing. In this work, we present MMBoundary, a novel framework that advances the knowledge boundary awareness of MLLMs through reasoning step confidence calibration. To achieve this, we propose to incorporate complementary textual and cross-modal self-rewarding signals to estimate confidence at each step of the MLLM reasoning process. In addition to supervised fine-tuning MLLM on this set of self-rewarding confidence estimation signal for initial confidence expression warm-up, we introduce a reinforcement learning stage with multiple reward functions for further aligning model knowledge and calibrating confidence at each reasoning step, enhancing reasoning chain self-correction. Empirical results show that MMBoundary significantly outperforms existing methods across diverse domain datasets and metrics, achieving an average of 7.5% reduction in multimodal confidence calibration errors and up to 8.3% improvement in task performance.

MMBoundary: Advancing MLLM Knowledge Boundary Awareness through Reasoning Step Confidence Calibration

As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve in natural language processing (NLP), their ability to stably follow instructions in long-context inputs has become critical for real-world applications. However, existing benchmarks seldom focus on instruction-following in long-context scenarios or stability on different inputs. To bridge this gap, we introduce LIFBench, a scalable dataset designed to evaluate LLMs' instruction-following capabilities and stability across long contexts. LIFBench comprises three long-context scenarios and eleven diverse tasks, featuring 2,766 instructions generated through an automated expansion method across three dimensions: length, expression, and variables. For evaluation, we propose LIFEval, a rubric-based assessment method that enables precise, automated scoring of complex LLM responses without reliance on LLM-assisted assessments or human judgment. This method allows for a comprehensive analysis of model performance and stability from multiple perspectives. We conduct detailed experiments on 20 prominent LLMs across six length intervals. Our work contributes LIFBench and LIFEval as robust tools for assessing LLM performance in complex and long-context settings, offering valuable insights to guide future advancements in LLM development.

LIFBench: Evaluating the Instruction Following Performance and Stability of Large Language Models in Long-Context Scenarios

Large language models demonstrate remarkable capabilities across various domains, especially mathematics and logic reasoning. However, current evaluations overlook physics-based reasoning - a complex task requiring physics theorems and constraints. We present PhysReason, a 1,200-problem benchmark comprising knowledge-based (25%) and reasoning-based (75%) problems, where the latter are divided into three difficulty levels (easy, medium, hard). Notably, problems require an average of 8.1 solution steps, with hard requiring 15.6, reflecting the complexity of physics-based reasoning. We propose the Physics Solution Auto Scoring Framework, incorporating efficient answer-level and comprehensive step-level evaluations. Top-performing models like Deepseek-R1, Gemini-2.0-Flash-Thinking, and o3-mini-high achieve less than 60% on answer-level evaluation, with performance dropping from knowledge questions (75.11%) to hard problems (31.95%). Through step-level evaluation, we identified four key bottlenecks: Physics Theorem Application, Physics Process Understanding, Calculation, and Physics Condition Analysis. These findings position PhysReason as a novel and comprehensive benchmark for evaluating physics-based reasoning capabilities in large language models.

PhysReason: A Comprehensive Benchmark towards Physics-Based Reasoning

This work explores sequential model editing in large language models (LLMs), a critical task that involves modifying internal knowledge within LLMs continuously through multi-round editing, each incorporating updates or corrections to adjust the model’s outputs without the need for costly retraining. Existing model editing methods, especially those that alter model parameters, typically focus on single-round editing and often face significant challenges in sequential model editing-most notably issues of model forgetting and failure. To address these challenges, we introduce a new model editing method, namely \textbf{N}euron-level \textbf{S}equential \textbf{E}diting (NSE), tailored for supporting sequential model editing. Specifically, we optimize the target layer's hidden states using the model's original weights to prevent model failure. Furthermore, we iteratively select neurons in multiple layers for editing based on their activation values to mitigate model forgetting. Our empirical experiments demonstrate that NSE significantly outperforms current modifying parameters model editing methods, marking a substantial advancement in the field of sequential model editing. Our code is released on \url{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/NSE-0A8D/}.

Neuron-Level Sequential Editing for Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) still face significant challenges in reasoning and arithmetic. Although temporal reasoning has raised increasing research attention, comprehensive testing of Allen's interval relations (e.g., before, after, during) —a fundamental framework for temporal relationships— remains underexplored. To fill this gap, we present ChronoSense, a new benchmark for evaluating LLMs' temporal understanding. It includes 16 tasks, identifying the Allen relation between two temporal events and temporal arithmetic. We assess the performance of seven recent LLMs. The results indicate that models handle Allen relations, even symmetrical ones, quite differently. Moreover, the findings suggest that the models may rely on memorization to answer time-related questions. Overall, the models' low performance highlights the need for improved temporal understanding in LLMs. Our dataset and the source code are available at https://github.com/duyguislakoglu/chronosense.

ChronoSense: Exploring Temporal Understanding in Large Language Models with Time Intervals of Events

Implementing new features in repository-level codebases is a crucial application of code generation models. However, current benchmarks lack a dedicated evaluation framework for this capability. To fill this gap, we introduce FEA-Bench, a benchmark designed to assess the ability of large language models (LLMs) to perform incremental development within code repositories. We collect pull requests from 83 GitHub repositories and use rule-based and intent-based filtering to construct task instances focused on new feature development. Each task instance containing code changes is paired with relevant unit test files to ensure that the solution can be verified. 
The feature implementation requires LLMs to simultaneously possess code completion capabilities for new components and code editing abilities for other relevant parts in the code repository, providing a more comprehensive evaluation method of LLMs' automated software engineering capabilities.
Experimental results show that LLMs perform significantly worse in the FEA-Bench, highlighting considerable challenges in such repository-level incremental code development.

FEA-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Repository-Level Code Generation for Feature Implementation

Code security and usability are both essential for various coding assistant applications driven by large language models (LLMs). Current code security benchmarks focus solely on single evaluation task and paradigm, such as code completion and generation, lacking comprehensive assessment across dimensions like secure code generation, vulnerability repair and discrimination. In this paper, we first propose CoV-Eval, a multi-task benchmark covering various tasks such as code completion, vulnerability repair, vulnerability detection and classification, for comprehensive evaluation of LLM code security. Besides, we developed VC-Judge, an improved judgment model that aligns closely with human experts and can review LLM-generated programs for vulnerabilities in a more efficient and reliable way. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of 20 proprietary and open-source LLMs. Overall, while most LLMs identify vulnerable codes well, they still tend to generate insecure codes and struggle with recognizing specific vulnerability types and performing repairs. Extensive experiments and qualitative analyses reveal key challenges and optimization directions, offering insights for future research in LLM code security.

Can You Really Trust Code Copilot? Evaluating Large Language Models from a Code Security Perspective

Training state-of-the-art large language models requires vast amounts of clean and diverse textual data. However, building suitable multilingual datasets remains a challenge. In this work, we present HPLT v2, a collection of high-quality multilingual monolingual and parallel corpora, extending prior work of the HPLT project. The monolingual portion of the data contains 8T tokens covering 193 languages, while the parallel data contains 380M sentence pairs covering 51 languages. We document the entire data pipeline and release the code to reproduce it. We provide extensive analysis of the quality and characteristics of our data. Finally, we evaluate the performance of language models and machine translation systems trained on HPLT v2, demonstrating its value.

An Expanded Massive Multilingual Dataset for High-Performance Language Technologies

As Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) advance, multimodal agents show promise in real-world tasks like web navigation and embodied intelligence. However, due to limitations in a lack of external feedback, these agents struggle with self-correction and generalization. A promising approach is to use reward models as external feedback, but there is no clear on how to select reward models for agents. Thus, there is an urgent need to build a reward bench targeted at agents. To address these challenges, we propose Agent-RewardBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate reward modeling ability in MLLMs. The benchmark is characterized by three key features: (1) Multiple dimensions and real-world agent scenarios evaluation. It covers perception, planning, and safety with 7 scenarios; (2) Step-level reward evaluation. It allows for the assessment of agent capabilities at the individual steps of a task, providing a more granular view of performance during the planning process; and (3) Appropriately difficulty and high-quality. We carefully sample from 10 diverse models, difficulty control to maintain task challenges, and manual verification to ensure the integrity of the data. Experiments demonstrate that even state-of-the-art multimodal models show limited performance, highlighting the need for specialized training in agent reward modeling. Code is available at github.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2025

What Matters in Evaluating Book-Length Stories? A Systematic Study of Long Story Evaluation

Similar lecture

A Study into Investigating Temporal Robustness of LLMs