China

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable generalization across diverse NLP tasks, yet they often produce outputs lacking semantic coherence due to insufficient grounding in structured linguistic knowledge. This paper proposes a novel method for injecting Frame Semantics into a pretrained LLaMA model using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA). Leveraging FrameNet (a rich resource of over 1,000 semantic frames) we construct a training corpus comprising structured triples of frame definitions, frame elements, and lexical units. Our method encodes these examples into the model via LoRA adapters and evaluates performance using zero-shot prompting for textual entailment and semantic role labeling (SRL) over Framenet. Experimental results show that our adapted frame-aware LLM substantially outperforms the baseline across closed, open-ended, and multiple-choice prompts. Moreover, we observe significant improvements in SRL accuracy, demonstrating the efficacy of combining frame-semantic theory with parameter-efficient pretraining.

EMNLP 2025

Injecting Frame Semantics into Large Language Models via Prompt-Based Fine-Tuning

structured linguistic knowledge

lora fine-tuning

large language models (llms)

semantic role labeling (srl)

instruction tuning

prompt engineering

frame semantics

framenet

knowledge injection

generalization

## Welcome!
"I am excited to welcome you to this year’s edition of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing! Importantly, it marks the 30th edition of EMNLP. With over 8,000 submissions, more than 3,000 accepted papers, and thousands of attendees, we have come a long way from that first
workshop, which had 14 accepted papers. As the field looks ahead, Suzhou is the fitting location for celebrating this milestone: rooted in a long literary tradition, yet modern and forward-looking, and home to a large share of the NLP community."<br>

*Message from the General Chair, Dirk Hovy*





<br>

Celebrate 30 Years of EMNLP! 
EMNLP 2025 will be held in Suzhou, China from November 5th to November 9th, 2025.

workshop paper

As language models continue to scale, the demand for knowledge editing, a retraining-free knowledge update method, has increased. However, since knowledge editing directly alters token prediction probabilities acquired during pretraining, the probabilities may diverge from the empirical distribution. In this study, we analyze the impact of knowledge editing to compare the alignment between token prediction probabilities and task accuracy by calculating confidence calibration before and after knowledge editing. Our results reveal that, for tasks requiring semantic understanding, the range of increase in token prediction probabilities tends to be smaller than that of accuracy improvement, suggesting that knowledge editing methods lead to less confidence in prediction.

Knowledge Editing Induces Underconfidence in Language Models

Large language models are increasingly deployed across diverse applications. This often includes tasks LLMs have not encountered during training.
This implies that enumerating and obtaining the high-quality training data for all tasks is infeasible. Thus, we often need to rely on transfer learning using datasets with different characteristics, and anticipate out-of-distribution requests.
Motivated by this practical need, we propose an analysis framework, building a transfer learning matrix and dimensionality reduction, to dissect these cross-task interactions.
We train and analyze 10 models to identify latent abilities (e.g., Reasoning, Sentiment Classification, NLU, Arithmetic)
and discover the side effects of the transfer learning.
Our findings reveal that performance improvements often defy explanations based on surface-level dataset similarity or source data quality. Instead, hidden statistical factors of the source dataset, such as class distribution and generation length proclivities, alongside specific linguistic features, are actually more influential.
This work offers insights into the complex dynamics of transfer learning, paving the way for more predictable and effective LLM adaptation.

Latent Traits and Cross-Task Transfer: Deconstructing Dataset Interactions in LLM Fine-tuning

Annotated data is essential for most NLP tasks, but creating it can be time-consuming and challenging. Argumentation annotation is especially complex, often resulting in moderate human agreement. While large language models (LLMs) have excelled in increasingly complex tasks, their application to argumentation annotation has been limited. This paper investigates how well GPT-4o and Claude can annotate three types of argumentation in Swedish data compared to human annotators. Using full annotation guidelines, we evaluate the models on argumentation schemes, argumentative spans, and attitude annotation. Both models perform similarly to humans across all tasks, with Claude showing better human agreement than GPT-4o. Agreement between models is higher than human agreement in argumentation scheme and span annotation.

LLMs as annotators of argumentation

To study computational models for language acquisition, we propose an interactive computational framework that utilizes a miniature language acquisition dataset in a controlled environment. In this framework, a neural learner model interacts with a teacher model that provides corrective feedback. Within this framework, we investigate various corrective feedback strategies, specifically focusing on reformulations and their effect on the learner model during their interactions. We design experimental settings to evaluate the learner's production of syntactically and semantically correct linguistic utterances and perception of concepts and word-meaning associations.
These results offer insights into the effectiveness of different feedback strategies in language acquisition using artificial neural networks. The outcome of this research is establishing a framework with a dataset for the systematic evaluation of various aspects of language acquisition in a controlled environment.

Modeling Language Learning in Corrective Feedback Interactions

Antonymy has long received particular attention in lexical semantics.
Previous studies have shown that antonym pairs frequently co-occur in text, across genres and parts of speech, more often than would be expected by chance. However, whether this co-occurrence pattern is distinctive of antonymy remains unclear, due to a lack of comparison with other semantic relations. This work fills the gap by comparing antonymy with three other relations across parts of speech using robust co-occurrence metrics. We find that antonymy is distinctive in three respects: antonym pairs co-occur with high strength, in a preferred linear order, and within short spans. All results are available online.

On the Distinctive Co-occurrence Characteristics of Antonymy

We introduce and explore the concept of potentially problematic word usages (PPWUs): word occurrences that are likely to cause communication breakdowns of a semantic nature. While much research has been devoted to lexical complexity, ambiguity, vagueness and related issues, no work has attempted to fully capture the intricate nature of PPWUs. We review linguistic factors, datasets and metrics that can be helpful for PPWU detection. We also discuss challenges to their study, such as their complexity and subjectivity, and highlight the need for future work on this phenomenon.

Potentially Problematic Word Usages and How to Detect Them: A Survey

While supervised relation extraction (RE) models have considerably advanced the state-of-the-art, they often perform poorly in low-resource settings. Zero-shot RE is vital when annotations are not available either due to costs or time constraints. As a result, zero-shot RE has garnered interest in the research community. With the advent of large language models (LLMs) many approaches have been proposed for prompting LLMs for RE, but these methods often either rely on an accompanying small language model (e.g., for finetuning on synthetic data generated by LLMs) or require complex post-prompt processing. In this paper, we propose an effective prompt-based method that does not require any additional resources. Instead, we use an LLM to perform a two-step process. In the first step, we perform a targeted summarization of the text with respect to the underlying relation, reduce the applicable label space, and synthesize examples. Then, we combine the products of these processes with other elements into a final prompt. We evaluate our approach with various LLMs on four real-world RE datasets. Our evaluation shows that our method outperforms the previous state-of-the-art zero-shot methods by a large margin. This work can also be considered as a new strong baseline for zero-shot RE that is compatible with any LLM.

Relation-Aware Prompting Makes Large Language Models Effective Zero-shot Relation Extractors

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems rely on high-quality embeddings to retrieve relevant context for large language models. This paper introduces the Semantic-Augmented Graph (SAG), a new architecture that improves domain-specific embeddings by capturing hierarchical semantic relationships between text segments. Inspired by human information processing, SAG organizes content from general to specific concepts using a graph-based structure. By combining static embeddings with dynamic semantic graphs, it generates context-aware representations that reflect both lexical and conceptual links. Experiments on text similarity and domain-specific question answering show that SAG consistently outperforms standard embedding methods within RAG pipelines.

SAG: Enhancing Domain-Specific Information Retrieval with Semantic-Augmented Graphs

Speech Emotion Recognition (SER) is essential for improving human-computer interaction, yet its accuracy remains constrained by the complexity of emotional nuances in speech. In this study, we distinguish between $descriptive\ semantics$, which represents the contextual content of speech, and $expressive\ semantics$, which reflects the speaker's emotional state. After watching emotionally charged movie segments, we recorded audio clips of participants describing their experiences, along with the intended emotion tags for each clip, participants' self-rated emotional responses, and their valence/arousal scores. Through experiments we show that descriptive semantics align with intended emotions, while expressive semantics correlate with evoked emotions. Our findings inform SER applications in human-AI interaction and pave the way for more context-aware AI systems.

Semantic Differentiation in Speech Emotion Recognition: Insights from Descriptive and Expressive Speech Roles

Semantic prosody is a collocational meaning formed through the co-occurrence of a linguistic unit and a consistent series of collocates, which should be treated separately from semantic meaning. Since words that are literal translation of each other may have different semantic prosody, more attention should be paid to this linguistic property in order to generate accurate translation. However, current machine translation models cannot handle this problem. To bridge the gap, we propose an approach to teach machine translation models about semantic prosody of a specific structure. We focus on Chinese BEI passives and create a dataset of English-Chinese sentence pairs with the purpose of demonstrating the negative semantic prosody of BEI passives. Then we fine-tune OPUS-MT, NLLB-600M and mBART50-mmt models with our dataset for the English-Chinese translation task. Our results show that fine-tuned MT models perform better on using BEI passives for translating unfavourable content and avoid using it for neutral and favourable content. Also, in NLLB-600M, which is a multilingual model, this knowledge of semantic prosody can be transferred from English-Chinese translation to other language pairs, such as Spanish-Chinese.

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2025

Knowledge Editing Induces Underconfidence in Language Models

Similar lecture

Do LLMs Encode Frame Semantics? Evidence from Frame Identification

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2025

Knowledge Editing Induces Underconfidence in Language Models

Similar lecture

Do LLMs Encode Frame Semantics? Evidence from Frame Identification

Downloads