Mexico

This paper addresses the issue of automated feedback generation for English language learners by presenting a corpus of English essays and their corresponding feedback, called LEAF, collected from the &quot;essayforum&quot; website. The corpus comprises approximately 6K essay-feedback pairs, offering a diverse and valuable resource for developing personalized feedback generation systems that address the critical deficiencies within essays, spanning from rectifying grammatical errors to offering insights on argumentative aspects and organizational coherence. Using this corpus, we present and compare multiple feedback generation baselines. Our findings shed light on the challenges of providing personalized feedback and highlight the potential of the LEAF corpus in advancing automated essay evaluation.

NAACL 2024

LEAF: Language Learners’ English Essays and Feedback Corpus

feedback generation

computer-assisted language learning

resources

## Welcome to 2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics!
This year, the conference is in Mexico City. NAACL was actually already planned for Mexico City in 2021, but due to the pandemic the entire conference was moved online. This year, finally, we get to go! So it is my sincere pleasure to welcome you to Mexico City, whether in person or virtually. Having the conference in Mexico City is a good opportunity to emphasize that NAACL is our flagship conference for ACL members not only in North America but also in Central and South America, even though NAACL has been bearing “North” in its name. At this year’s conference, we have a theme to match, with a theme track on the Languages of Latin America to showcase the linguistic diversity of the region.
 
The opportunity to present at NAACL should not depend on a researcher’s travel budget, or their family status. This is why it is so important to make virtual participation at NAACL as good an experience as possible – but we want to also provide a good experience for in-person participants. As a community, we are still working out the best way to do that. This year at NAACL, we are trying out a big virtual poster session ahead of the conference, with the hope that this will make make for a lively and interactive experience. At the same time, we are reducing virtual oral presentations, which seem to be particularly tricky to make to work well. A big thanks to the NAACL program chairs and to Luciana Benotti for all their ideas and work to improve the virtual experience. And participants, virtual as well as in-person: Please let us know what worked for you and what didn’t, so we can continue to improve hybrid conferences. 
 
I have been lucky to work with many amazing people. Without their insight, dedication and patience, and without the many hours of work they put in, NAACL would not have been possible. A huge thank you to the program chairs Helena Gomez, Kevin Duh, and Steve Bethard – you are the best! 
 
Finally, I would like to thank all authors, invited speakers and panelists, area chairs and reviewers, the volunteers organizing and chairing sessions, and all attendees, in-person and virtual. Thank you for helping us make NAACL 2024 come to life. 
 
Welcome and hope you all enjoy the conference! 
Katrin Erk 
The University of Texas at Austin 
NAACL-2024 General Chair 
*You can read the full Welcome message in the [Conference Handbook (downloadable)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H1NvW0VASQjkSCYgw3mr-3l4yYDSxz6B/view?usp=sharing)*

To access the event page you need to register [**here.**](http://acl.swoogo.com/naacl2024) 
Your access to the event page is limited based on your registration type. If you registered for workshops only, you will gain access to full workshops content on the day of the workshops program.

Please register!

2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

This paper addresses the issue of automated feedback generation for English language learners by presenting a corpus of English essays and their corresponding feedback, called LEAF, collected from the "essayforum" website. The corpus comprises approximately 6K essay-feedback pairs, offering a diverse and valuable resource for developing personalized feedback generation systems that address the critical deficiencies within essays, spanning from rectifying grammatical errors to offering insights on argumentative aspects and organizational coherence. Using this corpus, we present and compare multiple feedback generation baselines. Our findings shed light on the challenges of providing personalized feedback and highlight the potential of the LEAF corpus in advancing automated essay evaluation.

poster

Reliable human evaluation is critical to the development of successful natural language generation models, but achieving it is notoriously difficult. Stability is a crucial requirement when ranking systems by quality: consistent ranking of systems across repeated evaluations is not just desirable, but essential. Without it, there is no reliable foundation for hill-climbing or product launch decisions. In this paper, we use machine translation and its state-of-the-art human evaluation framework, MQM, as a case study to understand how to set up reliable human evaluations that yield stable conclusions. We investigate the optimal configurations for item allocation to raters, number of ratings per item, and score normalization. Our study on two language pairs provides concrete recommendations for designing replicable human evaluation studies. We also collect and release the largest publicly available dataset of multi-segment translations rated by multiple professional translators, consisting of nearly 140,000 segment annotations across two language pairs.

Finding Replicable Human Evaluations via Stable Ranking Probability

We explore the creative problem-solving capabilities of modern LLMs in a novel constrained setting. To this end, we create MACGYVER, an automatically generated dataset consisting of over 1,600 real-world problems deliberately designed to trigger innovative usage of objects and necessitate out-of-the-box thinking. We then present our collection to both LLMs and humans to compare and contrast their problem-solving abilities. MACGYVER is challenging for both groups, but in unique and complementary ways. For instance, humans excel in tasks they are familiar with but struggle with domain-specific knowledge, leading to a higher variance. In contrast, LLMs, exposed to a variety of specialized knowledge, attempt broader problems but fail by proposing physically-infeasible actions. Finally, we provide a detailed error analysis of LLMs, and demonstrate the potential of enhancing their problem-solving ability with novel prompting techniques such as iterative step-wise reflection and divergent-convergent thinking. This work (1) introduces a fresh arena for intelligent agents focusing on intricate aspects of physical reasoning, planning, and unconventional thinking, which supplements the existing spectrum of machine intelligence; and (2) provides insight into the constrained problem-solving capabilities of both humans and AI.

MacGyver: Are Large Language Models Creative Problem Solvers?

Without proper safeguards, large language models will readily follow malicious instructions and generate toxic content. This risk motivates safety efforts such as red-teaming and large-scale feedback learning, which aim to make models both helpful and harmless. However, there is a tension between these two objectives, since harmlessness requires models to refuse to comply with unsafe prompts, and thus not be helpful. Recent anecdotal evidence suggests that some models may have struck a poor balance, so that even clearly safe prompts are refused if they use similar language to unsafe prompts or mention sensitive topics. In this paper, we introduce a new test suite called XSTest to identify such eXaggerated Safety behaviours in a systematic way. XSTest comprises 250 safe prompts across ten prompt types that well-calibrated models should not refuse to comply with, and 200 unsafe prompts as contrasts that models, for most applications, should refuse. We describe XSTest's creation and composition, and then use the test suite to highlight systematic failure modes in state-of-the-art language models as well as more general challenges in building safer language models.

XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models

In recent times, large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on various document-level tasks such as document classification, summarization, and question-answering. However, research on understanding their capabilities on the task of self-contradictions in long documents has been very limited. In this work, we introduce ContraDoc, the first human-annotated dataset to study self-contradictions in long documents across multiple domains, varying document lengths, self-contradiction types, and appearance scope. We then analyze the current capabilities of four state-of-the-art open-source and commercially available LLMs: GPT3.5, GPT4, PaLM2, and LLaMAv2 on this dataset. While GPT4 performs the best and can outperform humans on this task, we find that it is still unreliable and struggles with self-contradictions that require more nuance and context. We release the dataset and all the code associated with the experiments.

ContraDoc: Understanding Self-Contradictions in Documents with Large Language Models

Babel Briefings is a novel dataset featuring 4.7 million news headlines from August 2020 to November 2021, across 30 languages and 54 locations worldwide with English translations of all articles included. Designed for natural language processing and media studies, it serves as a high-quality dataset for training or evaluating language models as well as offering a simple, accessible collection of articles, for example, to analyze global news coverage and cultural narratives. As a simple demonstration of the analyses facilitated by this dataset, we use a basic procedure using a TF-IDF weighted similarity metric to group articles into clusters about the same event. We then visualize the \emph{event signatures} of the event showing articles of which languages appear over time, revealing intuitive features based on the proximity of the event and unexpectedness of the event. The dataset is available on [Kaggle](https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/felixludos/babel-briefings) and [HuggingFace](https://huggingface.co/datasets/felixludos/babel-briefings) with accompanying [GitHub](https://github.com/felixludos/babel-briefings) code.

A diverse Multilingual News Headlines Dataset from around the World

Conversational moderation of online communities is crucial to maintaining civility for a constructive environment, but it is challenging to scale and harmful to moderators. The inclusion of sophisticated natural language generation modules as a force multiplier to aid human moderators is a tantalizing prospect, but adequate evaluation approaches have so far been elusive. In this paper, we establish a systematic definition of conversational moderation effectiveness grounded on moderation literature and establish design criteria for conducting realistic yet safe evaluation. We then propose a comprehensive evaluation framework to assess models' moderation capabilities independently of human intervention. With our framework, we conduct the first known study of language models as conversational moderators, finding that appropriately prompted models that incorporate insights from social science can provide specific and fair feedback on toxic behavior but struggle to influence users to increase their levels of respect and cooperation.

Can Language Model Moderators Improve the Health of Online Discourse?

Despite the high performances of large language models (LLMs) across numerous benchmarks, recent research has unveiled their suffering from hallucinations and unfaithful reasoning. This work studies a type of hallucination induced by semantic associations. We investigate to what extent LLMs take shortcuts from certain keyword/entity biases in the prompt instead of following correct reasoning paths. To quantify this phenomenon, we propose a novel probing method and benchmark called EUREQA. EUREQA is an entity-searching task where a model finds a missing entity based on described multi-hop relations with other entities. These deliberately designed multi-hop relations create deceptive semantic associations, and models must stick to the correct reasoning path instead of incorrect shortcuts to find the correct answer. Experiments show that existing LLMs cannot follow correct reasoning paths and resist the attempt of greedy shortcuts, with GPT-4 only achieving 62\% accuracy. Analyses provide further evidence that LLMs rely on semantic biases to solve the task instead of proper reasoning, questioning the validity and generalizability of current LLMs' high performances.

Deceptive Semantic Shortcuts on Reasoning Chains: How Far Can Models Go without Hallucination?

We assemble a broad Natural Language Understanding benchmark suite for the German language and consequently evaluate a wide array of existing German-capable models in order to create a better understanding of the current state of German LLMs. Our benchmark consists of 29 different tasks ranging over different types such as document classification, sequence tagging, sentence similarity, and question answering, on which we evaluate 10 different German-pretrained models, thereby charting the landscape of German LLMs. In our comprehensive evaluation we find that encoder models are a good choice for most tasks, but also that the largest encoder model does not necessarily perform best for all tasks. We make our benchmark suite and a leaderboard publically available at https://supergleber.professor-x.de and encourage the community to contribute new tasks and evaluate more models on it (https://github.com/LSX-UniWue/SuperGLEBer).

SuperGLEBer: German Language Understanding Evaluation Benchmark

We introduce BUST, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate detectors of texts generated by instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs). Unlike previous benchmarks, our focus lies on evaluating the performance of detector systems, acknowledging the inevitable influence of the underlying tasks and different LLM generators. Our benchmark dataset consists of 25K texts from humans and 7 LLMs responding to instructions across 10 tasks from 3 diverse sources. Using the benchmark, we evaluated 5 detectors and found substantial performance variance across tasks. A meta-analysis of the dataset characteristics was conducted to guide the examination of detector performance. The dataset was analyzed using diverse metrics assessing linguistic features like fluency and coherence, readability scores, and writer attitudes, such as emotions, convincingness, and persuasiveness. Features impacting detector performance were investigated with surrogate models, revealing emotional content in texts enhanced some detectors, yet the most effective detector demonstrated consistent performance, irrespective of writer’s attitudes and text styles. Our approach focused on investigating relationships between the detectors' performance and two key factors: text characteristics and LLM generators. We believe BUST will provide valuable insights into selecting detectors tailored to specific text styles and tasks and facilitate a more practical and in-depth investigation of detection systems for LLM-generated text.

BUST: Benchmark for the evaluation of detectors of LLM-Generated Text

Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently used for multi-faceted language generation and evaluation tasks that involve satisfying intricate user constraints or taking into account multiple aspects and criteria. However, their performance can fall short, due to the model's lack of coherence and inability to plan and decompose the problem. We propose Branch-Solve-Merge (BSM), a Large Language Model program (Schlag et al., 2023) for tackling such challenging natural language tasks. It consists of branch, solve, and merge modules that are parameterized with specific prompts to the base LLM. These three modules plan a decomposition of the task into multiple parallel sub-tasks, independently solve them, and fuse the solutions to the sub-tasks. We apply our method to the tasks of LLM response evaluation and constrained text generation and evaluate its effectiveness with multiple LLMs, including Vicuna, LLaMA-2-chat, and GPT-4. BSM improves the evaluation correctness and consistency for each LLM by enhancing human-LLM agreement by up to 26%, reducing length and pairwise position biases by up to 50%, and allowing LLaMA-2-chat to match or outperform GPT-4 on most domains. On a constraint story generation task, BSM improves the coherence of stories while also improving constraint satisfaction by 12%.

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2024

Finding Replicable Human Evaluations via Stable Ranking Probability

Similar lecture

Exploring LLM Prompting Strategies for Joint Essay Scoring and Feedback Generation