United States

Idiomatic expressions pose a major challenge for multilingual NLP because their meanings shift between figurative and literal usage, often requiring context for accurate interpretation. Prior work has focused on high-resource languages typically evaluates isolated idiom-meaning questions, overlooking realistic discourse. We introduce MIDI, a multilingual idiom dataset spanning 3 high-, 3 medium-, and 12 low-resource languages, curated by native speakers. Unlike previous datasets, MIDI provides idioms embedded in both sentence-level and conversational contexts, capturing both literal and figurative readings. Benchmarking state-of-the-art models shows that idiom comprehension degrades in low-resource languages and that, in all resource tiers, literal interpretations are substantially harder than figurative ones. Conversational context improves performance but does not eliminate these disparities. Through controlled tests and interventions on hidden representations, we further separate memorization from reasoning, exposing core limitations of current models.

ACL 2026

 Multilingual Idioms in Sentences and Conversations Across High-, Medium-, and Low-Resource Languages

stages 

COLING, the International Conference on Computational Linguistics, is one of the premier conferences for natural language processing and computational linguistics. Often grouped within the field of artificial intelligence, but actually pre-dating the development of artificial intelligence, advances in computational linguistics and natural language processing are now some of the major drivers behind the use of artificial intelligence for commercial and social applications – for example, on-line search, machine translation and with voice-assisted conversational devices.

First established in 1965, the biennial COLING conference is held in diverse parts of the globe and attracts participants from both top-ranked research centers and emerging countries. Today, the most important developments in our field are taking place not only in universities and academic research institutes, but also in industrial research departments and in technological startups. COLING conferences provide opportunities for all these communities to showcase their exciting developments.

COLING 2020

COLING, the International Conference on Computational Linguistics, is one of the premier conferences for natural language processing and computational linguistics. Often grouped within the field of artificial intelligence, but actually pre-dating the development of artificial intelligence, advances in computational linguistics and natural language processing are now some of the major drivers behind the use of artificial intelligence for commercial and social applications – for example, on-line search, machine translation and with voice-assisted conversational devices.

poster

It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026), held in San Diego, California, USA, July 2–7, 2026. ACL 2026 continues our fields 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.

It is exciting to see the many developments in the field reflected at our conference, such as the advancement of large language models (born out of our community) into many application directions. This is not without challenges, partly due to unsolved problems, and partly due to misuse of the technology. All this is reflected well at ACL 2026. The conference also reflects that the field is not only about advancing technology, but also the science of fundamentally understanding language and how it is use by many different speaker communities. <br>
[Full Message from General Chair Philipp Koehn](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing) <br><br><br>
<html><button style="display: inline-flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; white-space: nowrap; border-radius: 9999px; font-weight: bold; background: #7c3aed; color: white; font-family: 'Space Grotesk', sans-serif; height: 40px; font-size: 16px; padding: 0 20px; border: none; cursor: pointer" onclick="window.open('https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing')">Conference Handbook</button></html>
<br><br><br><br>

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. <br>Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to ACL 2026". 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 are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://2026.aclweb.org/registration/) first.

**Online Registration Form**: https://acl.swoogo.com/acl2026

Registration Required

The 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026) will take place in San Diego, California, from July 2 - 7, 2026.

Author response (rebuttal) writing is a critical stage of scientific peer review that demands substantial author effort. In practice, authors possess domain expertise, author-only information, and response strategies -- concrete forms of author expertise and intent -- and seek NLP assistance that integrates these signals into author response generation (ARG). Yet this author-in-the-loop paradigm lacks formal NLP formulation and systematic study: no dataset provides fine-grained author signals, existing ARG work lacks author inputs and controls, and no evaluation measures response reflection of author signals and effectiveness in addressing reviewer concerns. To fill these gaps, we introduce (i) Re³Align, the first large-scale dataset of aligned review–response–revision triplets, where revisions proxy author signals; (ii) REspGen, an author-in-the-loop ARG framework supporting flexible author input, multi-attribute control, and evaluation-guided refinement; and (iii) REspEval, a comprehensive evaluation suite with 20+ metrics spanning input utilization, controllability, response quality, and discourse. Experiments with SOTA LLMs demonstrate the benefits of author input and evaluation-guided refinement, the impact of input specificity on response quality, and controllability–quality trade-offs. We release our dataset, generation and evaluation tools.

Author-in-the-Loop Response Generation and Evaluation: Integrating Author Expertise and Intent in Responses to Peer Review

We introduce SPUR, a comprehensive benchmark for scientific experimental image perception, understanding, and reasoning, comprising 4,264 question-answering (QA) pairs derived from 1,084 expert-curated images. SPUR features three key innovations: (1) Panel-Level Fine-Grained Perception: evaluating the visual perception of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) across three dimensions (numerical, morphological, and information localization) on six fine-grained panel types; (2) Cross-Panel Relation Understanding: utilizing complex images with an average of 14.3 panels per sample to evaluate MLLMs' ability to decipher intricate cross-panel relations; (3) Expert-Level Reasoning: assessment of qualitative and quantitative reasoning across five experimental paradigms to determine if models can infer conclusions from evidence as human experts do. Comprehensive evaluation of 20 MLLMs and four multimodal Chain-of-Thought (MCoT) methods reveals that current models fall significantly short of the expert-level requirements for scientific image interpretation, underscoring a critical bottleneck in AI for Science (AI4S) research.

Decoding Scientific Experimental Images: The SPUR Benchmark for Perception, Understanding, and Reasoning

We investigate the degree to which human (and LLM) plausibility judgments of multiple-choice commonsense benchmark answers are subject to influence by (im)plausibility arguments for or against an answer, in particular, using rationales generated by LLMs. We collect $3,000$ plausibility judgments from humans and another $13,600$ judgments from LLMs. Overall, we observe increases and decreases in mean human plausibility ratings in the presence of LLM-generated PRO and CON rationales, respectively, suggesting that, on the whole, human judges find these rationales convincing. Experiments with LLMs reveal similar patterns of influence. Our findings demonstrate a novel use of LLMs for studying aspects of human cognition, while also raising practical concerns that, even in domains where humans are ``experts'' (i.e., common sense), LLMs have the potential to exert considerable influence on people's beliefs.

Arguments that Alter Minds: LLM Rationales Sway Human (and LLM) Notions of Plausibility

Agents built on vision-language models increasingly face tasks that demand anticipating future states rather than relying on short-horizon reasoning. Generative world models offer a promising remedy: agents could use them as external simulators to foresee outcomes before acting. This paper empirically examines whether current agents can leverage such world models as tools to enhance their cognition. Across diverse agentic and visual question answering tasks, we observe that some agents rarely invoke simulation (fewer than 1%), frequently misuse predicted rollouts (approximately 15%), and often exhibit inconsistent or even degraded performance (up to 5%) when simulation is available or enforced. Attribution analysis further indicates that the primary bottleneck lies in the agents’ capacity to decide when to simulate, how to interpret predicted outcomes, and how to integrate foresight into downstream reasoning. These findings underscore the need for mechanisms that foster calibrated, strategic interaction with world models, paving the way toward more reliable anticipatory cognition in future agent systems.

Current Agents Fail to Leverage World Model as Tool for Foresight

Chatbot service providers (e.g., OpenAI) rely on tiered subscription plans to generate revenue, offering black-box access to basic models for free users and advanced models to paying subscribers. However, this approach is unprofitable and inflexible. A pay-to-unlock scheme for premium features (e.g., math, coding) offers a more sustainable alternative. Enabling such a scheme requires a feature-locking technique (FLoTE) that is (i) *effective* in refusing locked features, (ii) *utility-preserving* for unlocked features, (iii) *robust* against evasion or unauthorized credential sharing, and (iv) *scalable* to multiple features and clients. Existing FLoTEs (e.g., password-locked models) fail to meet these criteria. To fill this gap, we present Locket, a more *robust and scalable* FLoTE to enable pay-to-unlock schemes. We develop a framework for adversarial training and merging of feature-locking *adapters*, which enables Locket to selectively disable specific features of a model. Evaluation shows that Locket is effective (100% refusal rate), utility-preserving ($\leq$ 7% utility degradation), robust ($\leq$ 5% attack success rate), and scalable to multiple features and clients.

Locket: Robust Feature-Locking Technique for Language Models

Output diversity is crucial for Large Language Models as it underpins pluralism and creativity.
In this work, we reveal that controlling the language used during model thinking—the *language of thought*—provides a novel and structural source of output diversity.
Our preliminary study shows that different thinking languages occupy distinct regions in a model's thinking space.
Based on this observation, we study two repeated sampling strategies under multilingual thinking—*Single-Language Sampling* and *Mixed-Language Sampling*—and conduct diversity evaluation on outputs that are controlled to be in English, regardless of the thinking language used.
Across extensive experiments, we demonstrate that switching the thinking language from English to non-English languages consistently increases output diversity, with a clear and consistent positive correlation such that languages farther from English in the thinking space yield larger gains.
We further show that aggregating samples across multiple thinking languages yields additional improvements through compositional effects, and that scaling sampling with linguistic heterogeneity expands the model's diversity ceiling.
Finally, we show that these findings translate into practical benefits in pluralistic alignment scenarios, leading to broader coverage of cultural knowledge and value orientations in LLM outputs. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/iNLP-Lab/Multilingual-LoT-Diversity.

 Language of Thought Shapes Output Diversity in Large Language Models

While multi-modal large language models such as GPT-5 demonstrate exceptional general understanding, they suffer from a fundamental Spatial Execution Gap, failing to translate visual semantics into precise, schema-valid coordinate operations in interactive environments. In this work, we show that model scale alone cannot close this gap; instead, verifiable structured reasoning provides the key to spatial precision. We present a comprehensive pipeline that leverages Group Relative Policy Optimization to enforce a strict Identify-Reason-Verify protocol, effectively shifting the computational burden from parameters to test-time reasoning. By utilizing a multi-agent system to distill optimal reasoning schemas and training on execution-verifiable rewards, our specialized 3B agent achieves 100% format coherence and 81.12% operation accuracy on digital whiteboard tasks. Crucially, our approach outperforms a state-of-the-art frontier model, GPT-5, by 16.75% in operation accuracy. The results suggest that for complex user interface manipulation, small, RL-aligned models with dedicated reasoning protocols are superior to generalist frontier models, offering a promising direction for building reliable web agents.

Closing the Spatial Execution Gap in Digital Whiteboards via Verifiable Reinforcement Learning

Existing web agents typically initiate exploration from the root URL, which is inefficient for complex websites with deep hierarchical structures. Without a global view of the website's structure, agents frequently fall into navigation traps, explore irrelevant branches, or fail to reach target information within a limited budget. We propose Mango, a multi-agent web navigation method that leverages the website structure to dynamically determine optimal starting points. We formulate URL selection as a multi-armed bandit problem and employ Thompson Sampling to adaptively allocate the navigation budget across candidate URLs. Furthermore, we introduce an episodic memory component to store navigation history, enabling the agent to learn from previous attempts. Experiments on WebVoyager demonstrate that Mango achieves a success rate of 63.6% when using GPT-5-mini, outperforming the best baseline by 7.3%. Furthermore, on WebWalkerQA, Mango attains a 52.5% success rate, surpassing the best baseline by 26.8%. We also demonstrate the generalizability of Mango using both open-source and closed-source models as backbones. Our data and code are open-source and available at https://github.com/VichyTong/Mango.

Mango: Multi-Agent Web Navigation via Global-View Optimization

Large language models (LLMs) can both evaluate and explain text quality; however, most existing evaluators operate as static classifiers and lack the ability to refine their reasoning through interaction. We propose an \textbf{Iterative Alpha--Beta Learning} framework that jointly trains two complementary 8B models: an Alpha ($\alpha$) classifier that assesses pairwise story engagement, and a Beta ($\beta$) generator that produces structured, rubric-guided comparative explanations. The two models co-evolve within a closed feedback loop: $\alpha$ provides probabilistic preference signals to guide $\beta$’s Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), while $\beta$’s improved explanations are reintegrated to retrain $\alpha$ via a KL-based contrastive objective. This dual optimization enables mutual learning: $\alpha$ gains interpretability and robustness from $\beta$’s textual rationales, while $\beta$ acquires stronger alignment and discriminative precision from $\alpha$’s confidence deltas. Experiments on human-annotated story-pair datasets HANNA show that the proposed system consistently outperforms strong single-model baselines in both accuracy and explanation quality across multiple iterative rounds.

Iterative Dual-Model Alignment for Story Evaluation

While model-based verifiers are essential for scaling Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), current outcome-centric verification paradigms primarily focus on the consistency between the final result and the ground truth, often neglecting potential errors in the derivation process. This leads to assigning positive rewards to correct answers produced from incorrect derivations. To bridge this gap, we introduce **PRIME**, a benchmark for evaluating verifiers on **PR**ocess-outcome alignment verification **I**n **M**athematics and **E**ngineering. Curated from a comprehensive collection of college-level STEM problems, **PRIME** comprises 2,530 high-difficulty samples through a consistency-based filtering pipeline. Through extensive evaluation, we find that current verifiers frequently fail to detect derivation flaws. Furthermore, we propose a process-aware RLVR training paradigm utilizing verifiers selected via **PRIME**. This approach substantially outperforms the outcome-only verification baseline, achieving absolute performance gains of **8.29%**, **9.12%**, and **7.31%** on AIME24, AIME25, and Beyond-AIME, respectively, for the Qwen3-14B-Base model. Finally, we demonstrate a strong linear correlation ($R^2 > 0.92$) between verifier accuracy on **PRIME** and RLVR training effectiveness, validating **PRIME** as a reliable predictor for verifier selection.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2026

Author-in-the-Loop Response Generation and Evaluation: Integrating Author Expertise and Intent in Responses to Peer Review

Similar lecture

Bilingual Lexical Access and Cognate Idiom Comprehension